THE  UNIVERSITY 


U 


NOT  A  PERIODICAL 

POLITICAl 
SCIENCE 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  STUDIES 

IN  THE 

SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

VOL.  VII  DECEMBER,  1918  No.  4 


THE    fOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION 
OF  AMERICA 

A  STUDY  IN  TRADE  UNION  POLICY 


BY 

CHARLES  JACOB   STOWELL,  Pn.D 


PRICE   fcl.OO 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
URBANA 

[Entered  as  second  class  matter,  July  27,  1915,  at  the  post  office  at 
Urbana,  Illinois,  under  the  Act  of  August  24,  1912.  Acceptance  for  mail- 
ing at  the  special  rate  of  postage  provided  for  in  section  1103,  Act  of  Oc- 
tober 3,  1917,  authorized  July  31,  1918.] 


UNIVEBSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

The  "University  of  Illinois  Studies  in  the  Social  Sciences"  are  designed 
to  afford  a  means  of  publishing  monographs  prepared  by  members  of  the 
faculty  or  graduate  students  in  the  departments  of  history,  economics, 
political  science,  and  sociology  in  the  University  of  Illinois.  Numbers  are 
published  quarterly,  and  constitute  an  annual  volume  of  about  600  pages. 
The  subscription  price  is  three  dollars  a  year. 

Vol.  I,  1912 

Nos.  1  and  2.     Financial  history  of  Ohio.     By  E.  L.  Bogart.     $1.80. 

No.  3.  Sources  of  municipal  revenues  in  Illinois.  By  L.  D.  Upson.  Out 
of  print. 

No.  4.  Friedrich  Gentz:  an  opponent  of  the  French  Revolution  and  Na- 
poleon. By  P.  F.  Reiff.  80  cents. 

Vol.  II,  1913 

No.  1.     Taxation   of   corporations   in   Illinois,    other   than   railroads,    since 

1872.     By  J.  E.  Moore.     55  cents. 
Nos.  2  and  3.     The  West  in  the  diplomatic  negotiations  of  the  American 

Revolution.     By  P.  C.  Phillips.     $1.25. 
No.  4.     The   development    of  banking   in   Illinois,   1817-1863.     By   G.   W. 

Dowrie.     90  cents. 

Vol.  Ill,  1914 

Nos.  1  and  2.  The  history  of  the  general  property  tax  in  Illinois.  By 
R.  M.  Haig.  $1.25. 

No.  3.  The  Scandinavian  element  in  the  United  States.  By  K.  C.  Bab- 
cock.  Out  of  print. 

No.  4.  Church  and  state  in  Massachusetts,  1691-1740.  By  Susan  M.  Reed. 
Out  of  print. 

Vol.  IV,  1915 

No.  1.     The  Illinois  Whigs  before  1846.     By  C.  M.  Thompson.     95  cents. 
No.  2.     The  defeat  of  Varus  and  the  German  frontier  policy  of  Augustus. 

By  W.  A.  Oldfather  and  H.  V.  Canter.     75  cents. 
Nos.  3  and  4.     The  history  of  the  Illinois  Central  railroad  to   1870.     By 

H.  G.  Brownson.     $1.25. 

(Continued  on  page  four  of  cover) 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  STUDIES 

IN  THE 
SOCIAL  SCIENCES 


VOL.  VII  DECEMBER,  1918  No.  4 


BOARD  OF  EDITORS 

ERNEST  L.  BOGART  JOHN  A.  FAIRLIE 

LAURENCE  M.  LARSON 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

UNDER  THE  AUSPICES  OF  THE  GRADUATE  SCHOOL 

URBANA,  ILLINOIS 


COPYRIGHT,  1918 
BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


The  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union 
of  America 

A  Study  in  Trade  Union  Policy 


CHARLES  JACOB  STOWELL 


PREFACE 

In  the  writer's  Studies  in  Trade  Unionism  in  the  Custom 
Tailoring  Trade,  published  as  a  Master's  thesis  in  1913,  is  found 
an  account  of  the  rise  and  growth  of  tailors'  unions  in  England 
and  America,  also  material  dealing  with  the  economic  history  of 
the  tailoring  trade,  and  with  recent  conditions  in  this  trade, 
including  statistics  of  the  present  national  union.  The  present 
thesis  is  a  continuation  of  studies  in  the  same  general  field,  and 
is  designed  to  give  an  account  of  the  policy  of  the  Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union  of  America  on  the  subjects  of  collective  bargain- 
ing, helpers  and  apprentices,  and  jurisdictional  questions.  The 
policy  of  the  union  is  first  considered  with  reference  to  the  in- 
terests of  the  journeymen  tailors  themselves,  but  in  the  conclud- 
ing chapter  an  effort  is  made  to  indicate  the  most  important  con- 
sequences of  this  policy  upon  the  industry  at  large  and  upon 
the  consumer. 

The  officers  and  members  of  the  Tailors'  Union  have  been  of 
great  assistance  in  the  preparation  of  this  study,  especial  thanks 
being  due  to  Mr.  Thomas  Sweeney,  secretary  of  the  union,  and 
to  Messrs.  John  B.  Lennon  and  E.  J.  Brais,  former  secretaries. 
The  writer  also  wishes  to  express  his  appreciation  of  criticism 
and  advice  given  by  members  of  the  Economics  Seminar,  Uni- 
versity of  Illinois. 

CHARLES  JACOB  STOWELL 
University  of  Illinois 
May,  1917 


CONTENTS 

PAGK 

INTRODUCTION.    HISTORICAL  SKETCH  OF  TAILORS  '  UNIONS  IN  AMERICA  9 

CHAPTEB  I 

COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING 13 

1.  METHODS  AND  TERRITORIAL  EXTENT  OF  BARGAINING       .        .  13 

2.  GENERAL  DESCRIPTION  OF  COLLECTIVE  AGREEMENTS       .        .  19 

3.  ECONOMIC  DEMANDS  AND  POLICIES  OF  THE  UNION        .        .  20 

a.  ^RECOGNITION  OF  THE  UNION 20 

b.  THE  UNION  SHOP 22 

c.  WAGES .      .  27 

d.  HOURS  OF  LABOR .       »  35 

e.  WORKSHOPS  AND  THE  PIECE  SYSTEM  .        .                .  38 

f.  THE  "EFFICIENCY"  MOVEMENT        .        .       .       .50 

g.  EEGULATION  OF  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES       .        .  53 

4.  STRIKES  AND  LOOKOUTS •    »    .    .       .  53 

a.  DEFINITIONS        .        .        .        .  •••    .        .        .       ..  53 

b.  GENERAL  STRIKE  POLICY  OF  THE  UNION     ...  54 
e.   STRIKE  BENEFIT  ........  55 

d.  DETAILED  EEGULATION  OF  STRIKES      ....  56 

e.  ENFORCEMENT  OF  STRIKE  BEGULATIONS      .        ....  57 

f.  AVOIDANCE  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  STRIKES           »        .  58 

g.  STATISTICS  OF  STRIKES 61 

5.  CONCLUDING  NOTE   ....        .        .        .        .        .  64 

CHAPTEB  II 

HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES        .        .        .        .        .        .        .        ;  65 

1.  DEFINITIONS  AND  TERMINOLOGY      .        .        ....  65 

2.  BEGULATION  OF  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES    .        .        .        .  66 

3.  INTERPRETATION  OF  UNION  BEGULATIONS       .        ...        .  72 
9.   PRESENT  CONDITIONS  WITH  BEFERENCE  TO  THE  SUPPLY  OF 

SKILLED  TAILORS      .        .        .             •  .        .                .  78 

CHAPTEB  III 

PROBLEMS  OF  JURISDICTION  AND  THE  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUS- 
TRIAL UNIONISM 82 

Brief  history  of  tailoring  trade  in  America;  early  efforts  to 
unite  custom  tailors  and  workers  oh  ready-made  clothing;  first 
clash  of  jurisdiction  between  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  and 
other  unions ;  subsequent  relations  between  Journeymen  Tailors ' 
Union  and  other  clothing  workers'  unions,  and  policies  adopted 


by  referendum  votes;  attempt  in  1913  to  amalgamate  all  cloth- 
ing workers'  unions;  dissolution  of  the  amalgamation;  present 
status  of  the  amalgamation  question;  conclusions. 

CHAPTER  IV 

GENERAL  ECONOMIC  BEARINGS 129 

GLOSSARY     .        .       ,. 135 

BIBLIOGRAPHY       ...........  136 

INDEX  .  140 


INTRODUCTION 

Historical  Sketch  of  Tailors'  Unions  in  America1 

The  journeymen  tailors  were  among  the  first  tradesmen  in 
America  to  organize.  There  was  a  strike  of  tailors  in  Baltimore  in 
1795,  and  again  in  1805.2  By  1806  there  were  at  least  three  tai- 
lors' societies — one  in  Philadelphia,  one  in  New  York  and  one  in 
Boston.3  Between  this  date  and  the  Civil  War  a  number  of  other 
local  societies  of  tailors  were  organized,  and  enjoyed  a  more  or 
less  continuous  and  successful  career.  In  Buffalo  in  1824,*  and  in 
Philadelphia  in  1827,5  the  tailors  were  involved  in  interesting 
conspiracy  trials.  A  similar  trial  growing  out  of  a  tailors' 
strike  in  New  York  City  in  1835  had  important  political  conse- 
quences, which  were  closely  connected  with  the  general  working- 
man's  movement  of  about  that  date.6  The  labor  movement 
among  the  tailors  appears  in  most  respects  to  have  followed  the 
trend  of  the  movement  in  general  during  the  years  1825-1860, 
although  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  tailors  took  part  in  the 
temporary  attempt  at  national  federation  of  trade  unions  in 

1  This  sketch  in  the  main  is  condensed  from  material  in  the  writer's 
Studies  in  Trade  Unionism  in  the  Custom  Tailoring  Trade. 

2  McMaster,  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States,  vol.  HI,  p.  511. 
s  The  Philadelphia  union  is  stated  to  have  been  the  first  by  the  Colorado 

Commissioner  of  Labor,  who  probably  obtained  his  information  from  officers 
of  the  Tailors'  Union  in  Denver.  The  Philadelphia  union  was  composed 
mainly  of  English  tailors,  who  until  its  organization  had  retained  their 
membership  in  English  unions.  (Colo.,  Biennial  Report  of  the  Bureau  of 
Labor  Statistics,  1899-1900,  p.  336.)  The  New  York  union  is  vouched  for 
by  Professor  Carlton  (History  and  Problems  of  Organized  Labor,  p.  17), 
and  the  Boston  union  by  its  present  officers  and  members,  who  celebrated 
the  Centennial  in  1906  (Tailor,  November  1906,  p.  17). 

*  Documentary  History  of  American  Industrial  Society,  vol.  IV,  pp. 
93-95. 

s  Ibid.,  vol.  IV,  pp.  99-264. 

e  Ibid.,  vol.  V,  Introduction,  pp.  36-37. 


10  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [438 

1834-1837.7  We  must  turn  to  a  later  date  for  the  real  beginning 
of  the  national  movement  on  the  part  of  the  tailors. 

The  first  national  union  of  tailors  of  which  we  have  any  record 
was  formed  in  1865  in  Philadelphia,  and  was  known  as  "The 
Journeymen  Tailors'  National  Trades  Union."8  The  conven- 
tion at  which  this  union  was  founded  was  composed  of  delegates 
from  the  following  cities:  New  York,  Philadelphia,  Washing- 
ton, Worcester,  Troy,  Cincinnati,  and  Louisville.  The  union 
held  conventions  every  year  from  1865  to  1876  inclusive,  but 
disintegrated  after  1876,  largely  on  account  of  the  embezzlement 
of  the  funds  by  an  officer  in  1875. 

A  period  now  ensued  of  about  seven  years,  including  a  part 
of  1883,  during  which  there  was  no  national  union  in  the  tailor- 
ing trade.  The  local  unions,  however,  continued  their  activity, 
and  we  have  the  record  of  strikes  in  several  localities  widely 
separated.9  In  1883  the  national  movement  was  resumed  on  the 
initiative  of  the  Philadelphia  local,  which  issued  a  call  for  a  con- 
vention to  meet  in  that  city  the  second  Monday  in  August,  1883. 
Five  local  unions  responded:  Philadelphia,  New  York,  Troy, 
Baltimore,  and  Pittsburgh.  Officers  were  elected  and  constitution 
and  by-laws  adopted.10  The  new  organization  was  entitled  ' '  The 
Journeymen  Tailors'  National  Union  of  the  United  States." 
This  union,  with  some  changes  of  title,  has  existed  continuously 
until  the  present  date. 

In  the  first  few  years  following  the  organization  of  the  union 

T  For  a  good  summary  of  the  period  1825-1840,  of.  Andrews  and  Bliss, 
"History  of  Women  in  Trade  Unions,"  p.  21,  in  Report  on  Condition  of 
Women  and  Child  Wage  Earners  in  the  United  States,  vol.  X;  and  for  the 
period  1840-1860,  ibid.,  p.  53. 

8  The  term  ' '  national  union ' '  in  1865  appears  to  have  been  used  to  de- 
scribe the  convention  or  delegate  body  rather  than  the  aggregate  of  all  the 
affiliated  locals  and  members.  Cf.  the  following  from  the  constitution 
adopted  in  1865,  Art.  2,  sec,  1:  "The  members  of  the  National  Union 
shall  be  composed  of  its  elective  officers,  and  representatives  from  local 
unions. ' ' 

»  Boston,  Cincinnati,  Pittsburgh,  New  York,  Dubuque,  Washington,  Den- 
ver, Des  Moines,  Freeport  (111.),  Philadelphia. 

10  It  is  possible  that  this  constitution  and  by-laws  were  not  printed. 
The  writer  has  relied  for  his  account  of  the  convention  upon  an  article 
written  in  1893  by  one  of  the  delegates,  and  the  earliest  constitution  of 
the  present  national  union  that  he  has  seen  is  dated  1884. 


439]  INTRODUCTION  11 

it  succeeded  in  affiliating  nearly  all  detached  locals  already  in 
existence,11  and  continued  to  organize  new  locals  as  opportunity 
presented.  Beginning  in  1883  with  five  locals  and  about  1800 
members,  by  1893  it  had  acquired  a  strength  of  200  locals  and 
10,200  members.  In  1897,  however,  the  next  date  for  which  sta- 
tistics are  reported,  the  number  of  locals  was  only  181,  and  the 
membership  had  decreased  to  about  5,700,  the  decline  being  due 
primarily  to  the  effects  of  the  panic  of  1893.12  In  1899  a  slight 
recovery  of  membership  was  noticeable,  and  by  1901  the  union 
had  regained  nearly  the  same  strength  as  in  1893.  From  1901 
to  1904  progress  was  rapid,  and  on  January  1,  1904,  the  maxi- 
mum membership  of  about  16,000  was  reached,13  although  the 
maximum  number  of  locals,  331,  was  not  reached  until  1907. 
Following  1907  there  was  a  decline,  both  in  the  number  of  locals 
and  in  the  number  of  members,  which  was  due  in  part  to  finan- 
cial depression,  and  in  part  to  the  rise  of  cheap  systems  of 
custom  tailoring  outside  of  union  jurisdiction. 

Since  1909  the  membership  has  been  about  stationary,  ranging 
from  12,000  to  13,000,  the  decline  being  arrested  by  a  more  vig- 
orous organizing  policy  "  and  by  the  determination  of  the  Tai- 
lors '  Union  to  organize  workers  on  the  cheaper  systems.  The 
latest  report  (June,  1916)  15  indicates  that  there  were  on  this 
date  283  local  unions  in  good  standing,  located  in  272  different 
cities  in  the  United  States  and  Canada,16  and  containing  about 

11  For  a  list  of  53  local  unions  of  which  a  record  has  been  found  as 
existing  prior  to  the  organization  of  the  present  national  union,  cf.  Sto- 
well,  op.  cit.,  pp.  58-59.    To  this  list  should  be  added  the  union  in  Madison, 
Wis.,  which  was  in  existence  as  early  as  1864.    Cf.  article  by  R.  N.  Qualey, 
in  The  Tailor,  September,  1906,  p.  8. 

12  One  of  the  effects  of  the  panic  was  the  almost  complete  loss  to  the 
national  union  of  the  New  York  local,  which  withdrew  after  a  disastrous 
strike  in  1894  to  resist  a  reduction  in  wages,  and  did  not  reaffrliate  until 
September,  1903. 

13  This  maximum  corresponds  very  nearly  in  date  with  the  reaffiliation  of 
the  New  York  local. 

i*  The  average  annual  expenditure  for  organizing  purposes  from  1909  to 
1915  was  $23,956.94,  as  compared  with  $13,769.98  for  the  period  1903-1909. 

is  Furnished  to  the  writer  by  Secretary  Sweeney. 

is  Two  cities,  Chicago  and  New  Haven,  contained  each  three  local  unions, 
and  each  of  the  following  cities  contained  two  local  unions:  Toronto, 
Buffalo,  Boston,  Pittsburgh,  Washington,  Denver,  and  San  Francisco.  In 


12  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [440 

13,000  members.  New  York,  with  1,606  union  members,17  and 
Chicago,  with  1,134,  were  the  only  cities  containing  more  than 
1,000  members.  Ten  cities  contained  200  to  1,000  each,  and  ten 
cities  100  to  200  each.  The  remaining  250  cities  contained  less  than 
100  members  each,  although  many  of  them  are  large  cities.  This 
is  an  important  commentary  on  the  relative  scarcity  of  skilled 
journeymen  tailors,  as  well  as  the  comparatively  low  per  cent  of 
organization  in  some  communities  —  matters  which  will  engage 
our  attention  more  fully  in  the  body  of  the  thesis.18 


the  cities  containing  more  than  one  local  union  the  pressers,  dyers  and 
cleaners  are  organized  in  separate  locals,  and  in  one  or  two  cases  the 
bushelmen. 

IT  Since  the  June,  1916,  report  the  membership  of  the  New  York  union 
has  been  reduced  to  less  than  1,000  as  the  result  of  an  unsuccessful  strike. 

is  Cf.  infra,  Ch.  I,  pp.  24-26,  and  Ch.  II,  pp.  78-81. 


CHAPTER  I 

COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING 

In  the  present  chapter  the  most  important  problems  connected 
with  collective  bargaining  in  the  custom  tailoring  trade  will  be 
taken  up  under  topical  heads  and  analyzed  with  reference  to  the 
policies  and  practices  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  and  its 
affiliated  locals. 

1.      METHODS  AND  TERRITORIAL  EXTENT  OF  BARGAINING 

All  negotiations  with  employers  are  carried  on  by  representa- 
tives of  the  local  or  national  union,  and  in  no  case  by  the  indi- 
vidual members.  This  policy  is  clearly  laid  down  in  the  consti- 
tution.1 

In  small  cities,  and  in  small  shops  in  large  cities,  there  is 
generally  no  shop  organization,  and  in  such  cases,  if  the  tailors 
working  in  any  shop  wish  to  take  up  demands  or  grievances  with 
their  employer,  they  can  bring  the  matter  informally  to  the  at- 
tention of  the  local  union,  which  will  then  take  the  responsibility 
for  further  negotiations.  Negotiations  on  behalf  of  the  local 
union  may  be  carried  on  by  a  standing  committee  or  by  a  com- 
mittee appointed  for  the  occasion.  Where  the  local  union  em- 
ploys regularly  a  local  organizer  or  business  agent,  this  officer 
ordinarily  takes  charge  of  the  negotiations,  assisted  by  the  com- 
mittee. If  an  organizer  of  the  national  union  is  present  he  will 
act  in  an  advisory  capacity  to  the  local  officers  and  committees, 
and  by  action  of  the  local  union  may  be  given  charge  of  negotia- 
tions, with  a  status  similar  to  that  of  the  local  business  agent. 
It  should  be  understood  that  in  all  of  these  cases  the  local  union 
must  approve  the  final  settlement. 

In  large  shops  in  the  large  cities  there  is  frequently  a  shop 
organization  known  as  the  "shop  meeting."  Business  affecting 

1 1914,  Sees.  79,  95,  131,  and  153. 

13 


14  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [442 

a  given  shop  is  transacted  by  the  shop  meeting,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  local  union.  In  New  York  City,  while  mass 
meetings  of  all  the  members  are  called  from  time  to  time,  a  great 
deal  of  the  business  of  the  union  is  transacted  by  a  delegate  body 
composed  of  representatives  from  the  several  shop  meetings.2 
Where  shop  meetings  exist,  therefore,  negotiations  with  employ- 
ers will  frequently  be  handled  through  the  shop  meetings  affect- 
ed. If  more  than  one  shop  is  affected,  but  the  demands  are 
uniform  in  all,  the  different  shops  or  shop  meetings  may  in  some 
cases  form  a  conference  committee  to  deal  with  a  like  committee 
from  the  employers.  If  the  demands  are  not  uniform,  but  dif- 
ferent demands  are  to  be  presented  in  several  different  shops, 
there  is  usually  some  basis  of  classification,  the  demands  being 
uniform  for  shops  of  a  certain  class;  in  this  case  there  will 
sometimes  be  a  conference  committee  of  employees  and  of 
employers  for  each  class  of  shops.  Just  what  method  of  handling 
negotiations  will  be  employed  in  each  case  will  depend  on  cir- 
cumstances, and  will  be  governed  in  part  by  the  kind  of  organi- 
zation and  the  arrangements  with  respect  to  officers  and  com- 
mittees prevailing  in  the  local  union. 

In  cases  of  negotiations  involving  all  shops,  or  at  any  rate  all 
union  shops,  in  a  city,  negotiations  on  the  employers'  side  are 
sometimes  carried  on  by  a  committee  representing  the  local  em- 
ployers' association,  or  Merchant  Tailors'  Exchange,  as  it  is 
usually  called.3  But  this  is  not  customary  except  in  the  larger 
cities.  Where  the  merchant  tailors  are  not  organized,  negotia- 
tions affecting  all  of  the  shops  present  no  unusual  features,  un- 
less the  matter  comes  to  a  strike,  in  which  case  the  merchant 
tailors  often  organize  temporarily  to  safeguard  their  interests. 

The  Tailors '  Union  takes  a  favorable  attitude  toward  carrying 
on  negotiations  with  the  local  employers'  associations.  As  early 

2  Some  of  the  earlier  issues  of  The  Tailor  contain  lists  of  the  shop  meet- 
ings in  large  cities.    For  example,  in  1891,  there  were  59  shop  meetings  in 
New  York  City,  which  met  every  week;  and  in  Chicago  there  were  15  shop 
meetings,  meeting  usually  every  two  weeks.     The  Tailor,  May,  1891,  inside 
back  cover. 

3  Secretary  Samuel  H.  Spring  of  the  National  Association  of  Merchant 
Tailors  says  in  correspondence  with  the  writer:     "Some  of  the  local  asso- 
ciations do  have  committees  whose   duty  it  is  to   care  for   strikes  or  dis- 
putes. ' ' 


443]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  15 

' 

as  1889  Secretary  Lennon2  advocated  conference  committees  of 
the  unions  on  the  one  hand  and  of  the  employers'  exchanges 
on  the  other,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  strikes;5  and  in 
1909  the  convention  and  the  membership  adopted  a  resolution  to 
the  same  effect.6 

It  has  been  impossible  to  bring  about  arrangements  between 
the  Tailors'  Union  and  the  national  employers'  associations  for 
national  conferences  for  the  adjustment  of  disputes.  In  the 
early  days  of  the  Tailors'  Union  there  was  no  apparent  hostility 
between  the  employers'  organization,  then  known  as  the  Mer- 
chant Tailors'  National  Exchange,7  and  the  union.  On  the  con- 
trary, there  appeared  to  be  some  grounds  for  cooperation,  par- 
ticularly in  connection  with  tariff  laws  which  were  regarded  as 
injurious  to  the  trade,  and  with  regard  to  the  importation  of 
English-made  clothing,  which  required  to  be  altered  to  fit  Amer- 
ican styles,  and  which  the  American  journeymen  had  more  than 
once  refused  to  alter.8  In  fact,  representatives  of  the  union  took 
part  on  several  occasions  with  representatives  of  the  employers 
in  conferences,  and  in  one  case  in  a  mass  meeting,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  securing  changes  in  the  tariff  laws  affecting  the  tailoring 
industry.9  However,  by  1893  the  exchange  was  recognized  as  an 
opponent  by  the  union,  and  in  his  1893  report 10  Secretary  Len- 
non, after  remarking  that  during  the  preceding  year  there  had 
been  many  conflicts  between  the  union  and  the  exchange,  which 
had  been  expensive  to  both,  recommended  that  the  executive 
officers  of  the  union  should  confer  with  the  officers  of  the  ex- 
change and  endeavor  to  formulate  some  plan  of  arbitration  for 

*John  B.  Lennon  was  president  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of 
America  for  the  year  1884-1885,  and  general  secretary  for  twenty-three 
years,  from  1887-1910.  The  office  of  president  was  abolished  in  1889, 
leaving  the  secretary  as  chief  executive.  For  biographical  sketch  of  Mr. 
Lennon,  cf.  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  p.  93. 

s  The  Tailor,  November,  1889,  article  on  < '  The  Evils  of  the  Trade  and 
how  to  Eemedy  Them." 

6  The  Tailor,  August,  1909,  p.  44,  Proposition  No.  40 ;  vote,  November, 
1909,    supplement. 

7  Organized  1887. 

s  The  Tailor,  August,  1891,  p.  2,  and  August,  1893,  p.  3,  reports  of  gen- 
eral secretary  on  conference  committees. 

9  The  Tailor,  March,  1892,  p.  4;  April,  1892,  p.  4;  June,  1892,  p.  4. 

10  The  Tailor,  August,  1893. 


16  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [444 

the  settlement  of  any  difference  that  might  arise.  The  result  of 
this  recommendation  will  appear  in  a  later  paragraph. 

In  1896  the  exchange  endeavored  to  establish  a  mutual  bene- 
fit fund  for  employees  of  its  members,  but  this  plan  was  viewed 
with  suspicion  by  the  union  men,  and  seems  to  have  met  with 
little  success.11  In  1901,  and  again  in  1903,  Mr.  Lennon  repeated 
his  recommendation  that  the  exchange  be  approached  on  the 
subject  of  arbitration.12  The  1903  committee  on  laws  and  audit 1S 
approved  specifically  this  recommendation,  and  the  general  sec- 
retary was  instructed  by  the  Executive  Board  to  open  corre- 
spondence with  the  Merchant  Tailors'  National  Exchange.14 

To  understand  the  results  of  this  correspondence  it  is  neces- 
sary to  note  that  in  February,  1903,  a  new  association  of  mer- 
chants was  formed,  known  as  the  Merchant  Tailors'  National 
Protective  Association,  which  was  a  characteristic  "open-shop" 
association,  organized  for  the  purpose  of  releasing  the  merchant 
tailors  from  what  they  regarded  as  the  domination  of  the  un- 
ions.15 Not  all  of  the  local  branches  of  the  old  Merchant  Tailors' 

11  The  Tailor,  February,  1896,  p.  6,  and  editorial,  p.  8. 

12  The  Tailor,  August,  1901,  p.  4,  and  August,  1903,  p.  5,  reports  of  gen- 
eral secretary  on  "Arbitration." 

is  Proceedings,  The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  15.  Prior  to  1894,  constitu- 
tional questions  were  submitted  to  committees  of  the  convention.  In  1894 
an  amendment  was  passed  providing  for  a  special  committee  to  meet  before 
each  convention,  to  be  known  as  the  committee  on  laws  and  audit.  This 
committee  was  required  to  audit  the  books  of  the  general  officers,  to  exam- 
ine proposed  amendments  to  the  constitution,  and  to  make  a  report  to  the 
convention.  In  1896  this  committee  was  given  power  to  take  the  place  of  a 
convention  in  years  when  the  convention  did  not  meet,  and  to  send  out  such 
propositions  as  it  approved  for  a  general  vote.  In  1897,  1899,  1901,  1903, 
and  1907  the  committee  acted  in  this  capacity,  no  conventions  being  held 
in  these  years.  In  1909  the  meetings  of  the  committee  between  conventions 
were  abolished,  but  its  services  before  conventions  are  still  retained. 

i*  Proceedings  General  Executive  Board,  The  Tailor,  September,  1903,  p. 
17. 

13  The  following  is  quoted  in  The  Tailor,  May,  1903,  p.  9,  as  a  correct 
description  of  the  principles  of  the  Merchant  Tailors'  National  Protective 
Association,  reprinted  from  its  literature: 

"In  the  association's  declaration  of  principles  any  intention  to  interfere 
with  the  'proper  functions'  of  labor  organizations  is  disclaimed.  It  is  also 
set  forth  that  strikes  and  lockouts  are  absolutely  disapproved  of,  and  that 
no  question  will  be  arbitrated  with  men  on  strike;  no  lockout  will  be  coun- 
tenanced on  any  arbitrable  question  unless  arbitration  has  failed;  workmen 


445]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  17 

National  Exchange  joined  the  Protective  Association,  but  for 
the  time  being  the  latter  association  took  up  the  functions  of  an 
employers'  association  in  the  trade.  The  communication,  there- 
fore, of  the  Tailors'  secretary,  addressed  to  the  exchange,  and 
suggesting  the  adoption  of  a  system  of  arbitration,  was  referred 
to  the  Protective  Association.  The  reply  of  the  Protective  Asso- 
ciation, together  with  some  references  to  the  previous  experience 
of  the  union  with  the  exchange,  is  indicated  by  the  following 
extract  from  Secretary  Lennon's  report  to  the  1905  convention  :16 
Their  officers  [i.  e.,  the  officers  of  the  Protective  Association]  answered 
to  the  effect  that  nothing  could  be  done  with  the  matter  until  their  coming 
convention  which  was  held  in  February  1903.  Immediately  after  that  I  re- 
ceived a  communication  stating  in  essence  that  they  could  not  take  the 
matter  up  for  the  reason  that  there  were  some  things  declared  for  in  our 

will  not  be  discriminated  against  because  of  membership  in  any  society  or 
organization;  number  of  apprentices  is  to  be  determined  solely  by  the  em- 
ployer; employees  will  not  be  permitted  to  place  any  restriction  on  methods 
of  production  of  the  employer,  who  will  also  elect  whether  employees  shall 
be  paid  by  the  piece  or  by  the  hour;  employees  may  leave  when  they  see  fit 
and  may  be  discharged  when  the  employer  sees  fit  -  these  being  matters  not 
subject  to  arbitration.  The  association  advises  its  members  to  meet  their 
employees  individually  or  collectively  and  endeavor  to  adjust  difficulties  on 
an  equitable  basis.  This  failing,  a  board  of  arbitration  is  advised,  the  em- 
ployees keeping  at  work  pending  its  decision.  Members  not  complying  with 
these  recommendations  are  denied  the  support  of  the  association,  unless  the 
organization  approves  the  course  taken.  The  declaration  of  principles  con- 
cludes as  follows: 

"  'This  association  will  not  countenance  any  conditions  of  wages  which 
are  not  just,  or  which  will  not  allow  a  workman  of  average  efficiency  to  earn 
at  least  a  fair  wage.' 

"According  to  a  booklet  issued  by  the  association,  the  organization  will 
stand  for  American  rights  and  American  freedom;  it  will  provide  for  the 
interchange  of  information  concerning  the  character  and  competency  of 
employees  and  the  distribution  of  journeymen  as  circumstances  require.  A 
system  of  registration  of  employees  and  the  use  of  recommendation  and 
identification  cards  is  also  to  be  instituted.  Every  effort  is  to  be  made  to 
settle  disputes  amicably,  but  if  the  organization  is  forced  ino  a  conflict,  a 
solid  front  is  to  be  presented.  The  association  will,  in  case  of  trouble, 
assist  in  procuring  workmen  and  in  having  the  members'  work  done.  It 
will,  through  its  agents  in  every  city,  be  promptly  advised  of  any  proposed 
action  detrimental  to  the  interests  of  its  members  and  be  prepared  for  any 
emergency  which  may  arise. ' ' 

i«  The  Tailor,  February,  1905,  p.  8.  For  Lennon  's  view  of  the  Protec- 
tive Association,  see  also  The  Tailor,  June,  1903,  p.  16,  editorial;  and  Aug- 
ust, 1909,  p.  11,  secretary's  report  to  the  1909  convention. 


18  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [446 

constitution  that  they  considered  antagonistic  to  the  best  interest  of  the 
merchant  tailors  of  the  country.  What  the  matters  were  to  which  they 
referred  they  did  not,  however,  state.  An  additional  letter  was  written  by 
myself  suggesting  that  even  these  things  of  which  they  complained  might 
in  some  way  be  adjusted  or  eliminated,  if  we  could  only  meet  and  talk  the 
matter  over,  but  nothing  came  of  it,  as  apparently  the  Protective  Associa- 
tion had  no  desire  to  do  business  with  us  along  the  lines  of  either  concili- 
ation or  arbitration. 

The  St.  Paul  Convention  which  was  held  over  eleven  years  ago  appointed 
Bro.  Frederick  Jensen  and  myself  a  committee  to  confer  with  the  Merchant 
Tailors'  National  Exchange  upon  the  same  subject  of  conciliation  and  arbi- 
tration. We  attended  their  convention  held  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  submitted 
the  matter  to  them,  and  were  told  by  their  committee  that  they  had  decided 
to  do  nothing  in  the  matter  for  the  reason  that  there  were  too  large  a 
number  of  their  members  who  did  not  employ  members  of  the  J.  T.  TJ.  of  A. 
Our  Union  has  stood  from  its  very  beginning  for  conciliation  and  arbitration 
of  any  disputes  that  might  arise  in  so  far  as  they  refer  to  questions  of 
wages,  conditions  of  labor  or  any  of  those  questions  which  are  in  most 
every  case  the  cause  of  strikes  and  lockouts.  We  have  been  invariably 
turned  down  by  the  organization  of  the  Merchant  Tailors.  I  make  this 
statement  so  that  you  will  have  the  record,  and  that  the  world  at  large  can 
have  the  record  showing  that  it  is  not  the  trade  union  that  refuses  concilia- 
tion and  arbitration.  At  least  not  in  our  trade,  but  that  it  is  the  employers ' 
associations,  and  I  am  sure  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  will  be  found  ready  in  the 
future  as  in  the  past  at  any  time  the  Merchant  Tailors'  organization  are 
willing  to  meet  with  us  and  attempt  faithfully  and  honestly  to  arrive  at 
some  kind  of  an  agreement  and  understanding  that  will  make  for  continued 
peace,  and  consequent  continued  prosperity  in  the  merchant  tailoring  in- 
dustry. 

In  February,  1906,  representatives  of  several  of  the  local 
branches  of  merchant  tailors  which  had  not  joined  the  Protec- 
tive Association  met  in  New  York  City  and  re-formed  the  Nation- 
al Exchange.  The  Protective  Association  and  the  National  Ex- 
change continued  their  existence  side  by  side  until  February, 
1910,  when  they  held  a  joint  convention  and  united  under  the 
title,  "National  Association  of  Merchant  Tailors  of  America."  1T 

The  report  of  Secretary  Lennon  to  the  1909  convention  of  the 
Tailors  indicated  that  up  to  that  date  no  further  satisfaction  had 
been  obtained  in  the  matter  of  negotiating  a  plan  of  arbitration 
with  the  merchant  tailors'  associations.  In  1911  and  1912  Sec- 
retary Brais  attended  the  convention  of  the  National  Association 
of  Merchant  Tailors,  and  was  given  the  floor  to  address  the  con- 
vention. He  reported  that  he  found  a  friendly  spirit  manifested 

17  Samuel  H.  Spring,  correspondence,  October  29,  1916. 


447]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  19 

toward  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union,  and  that  the  new  mer- 
chants' association  had  appointed  a  labor  committee,  which  was 
willing  to  meet  with  a  committee  of  the  union.  However,  Mr. 
Brais  reported  further,  the  merchants'  association  in  1912  had 
local  branches  in  only  fourteen  cities,  although  they  had  individ- 
ual members  in  seventy-five  cities,  and  it  was  the  opinion  of  the 
president  of  the  association  that  his  organization  would  have  to 
become  more  extensive  before  a  national  agreement  with  the 
union  would  be  possible.18 

In  February,  1916,  the  National  Association  of  Merchant 
Tailors  included  thirteen  local  associations19  and  two  hundred 
individual  members  representing  one  hundred  and  twenty-five 
cities  in  which  there  were  no  local  associations.20  The  literature 
of  the  association  indicates  that  it  is  organized  to  promote  the 
interests  of  its  members,  both  in  a  mercantile  way  and  in  con- 
nection with  labor  troubles,  but  there  is  no  evidence  of  any  hos- 
tility to  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  as  such,  and  the  secre- 
tary of  the  Merchants'  Association  states  that  its  members  have 
had  "very  little  real  serious  trouble,  nothing  general,"21  with 
their  employees. 

2.      GENERAL  DESCRIPTION  OF   COLLECTIVE   AGREEMENTS 

The  collective  agreement  in  the  tailoring  industry  is  primarily 
a  list  of  piece  rates,  and  is  universally  known  as  a  "bill  of 
prices. ' '  However,  the  agreement  may,  and  generally  does,  con- 
tain provisions  covering  matters  other  than  wages.  These  addi- 
tional provisions  will  be  discussed  in  their  proper  places.  At 
this  point  it  is  desired  to  call  attention  only  to  a  clause  in  the 
model  agreement  approved  by  the  Tailors'  Union.22  This  clause 

is  The  Tailor,  March,  1911,  p.  22;  E.  J.  Brais,  correspondence,  March  2, 
1912. 

!9  Boston,  Buffalo,  Chicago,  Cincinnati,  Cleveland,  Denver,  Erie,  New- 
York  City,  Philadelphia,  Providence,  St.  Louis,  Toledo,  Washington. 

20  Official  Record  of  the  Seventh  Annual  Convention  of  the  National 
Association  of  Merchant  Tailors  of  America,  St.  Louis,  Missouri,  February 
8-10,  1916. 

21  Samuel  H.  Spring,  correspondence,  October  29,  1916. 

22  In  1905  a  model  agreement  was  drawn  up  by  a  committee  of  the  Tail- 
ors' Union  and  approved  by  a  referendum  vote.     This  model  agreement 
contains  all  of  the  usual  items,  but  the  prices  are  left  blank  to  be  filled  in 
by   agreement  between  the  union  and   the  employers  in  each   city.      The 
Tailor,  August,  1905,  pp.  1-4. 


20  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS '  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [448 

provides  that  the  agreement  shall  be  self-renewing,  unless  one 
of  the  parties  desires  a  change.23  This  provision  is  of  more  im- 
portance than  appears  at  first  sight.  It  was  found  by  the  Tailors 
that  the  mere  presentation  of  a  bill  for  renewal  was  frequently 
irritating  to  the  employers,  and  if  the  latter  happened  to  be  in  an 
"open-shop"  frame  of  mind,  the  request  for  renewal  might  be 
made  the  occasion  for  a  break  with  the  union.  There  is  little 
doubt  that  the  self-renewing  feature  of  the  agreement  has  con- 
siderably reduced  the  friction  between  employers  and  employees. 

3.      ECONOMIC  DEMANDS  AND  POLICIES  OF  THE  UNION 

(a)   Recognition  of  the  Union 

The  demand  for  recognition  of  the  union  is  essentially  equiv- 
alent to  a  demand  that  the  employer  shall  recognize  and  employ 
the  system  of  collective  bargaining  for  determining  the  terms  and 
conditions  of  employment.  "Recognition  of  the  union"  implies 
that  the  employer  will  meet  the  representatives  of  the  union, 
whether  his  own  employees  or  not,  and  deal  with  them  as  the 
authorized  representatives  of  his  employees.  As  in  most  indus- 
tries, the  union  has  been  obliged  on  a  number  of  occasions  to 
fight  for  this  kind  of  recognition.  Particularly  during  the  period 
of  ascendency  of  the  Merchant  Tailors'  National  Protective  As- 
sociation, there  were  frequent  attempts  on  the  part  of  employers 
to  oblige  their  employees  to  bargain  as  individuals.  Sometimes 
the  expiration  of  a  former  agreement  and  the  presentation  of  a 
new  scale  of  prices  by  the  employees  was  made  the  occasion  for 
the  break  by  the  employers.  The  unions  have  invariably  refused 
to  abandon  the  principle  of  collective  bargaining,  and  in  most 
cases  the  employers  have  given  up  their  demands  and  made  a 
settlement  with  the  union  committees,  although  sometimes  long 

23  ' '  It  is  hereby  agreed  by  and  between  the  parties  hereto  that  the  above 
bill  of  prices  and  conditions  shall  be  in  full  force  and  effect  from  and 
after  .  .  .  for  one  year,  and  shall  continue  indefinitely  provided,  how- 
ever, that  at  least  thirty  days  prior  to  each  year's  termination  and  every 
year  thereafter,  if  either  party  wishes  to  change  any  provision  of  this  bill 
of  prices  and  agreement,  they  shall  notify  the  other  party,  in  writing,  to 
that  effect,  specifying  the  change  or  changes  desired,  whereupon  a  meeting 
shall  be  arranged  between  the  parties  hereto,  to  make  a  new  agreement,  if 
possible."  Model  Agreement,  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America,  The 
Tailor,  loc.  cit. 


449]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  21 

and  expensive  strikes  were  necessary  before  this  result  was  se- 
cured.2* 

During  the  years  when  the  " open-shop"  agitation  by  employ- 
ers in  all  industries  was  most  vigorous,  it  frequently  happened 
in  the  tailoring  trade  that  an  employer  who  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  doing  business  with  the  union  announced  that  hence- 
forward he  was  going  to  run  an  "open  shop."  Such  an  an- 
nouncement generally  created  considerable  excitement  in  the 
local  union,  and  letters  were  dispatched  to  headquarters  asking 
permission  to  call  a  strike  to  compel  ' '  recognition  of  the  union ' ' 
by  the  employer.  In  such  cases  Secretary  Lennon  was  accus- 
tomed to  advise  the  locals  that  it  made  no  difference  what  the 
employer  called  his  shop,  as  long  as  the  people  working  there 
were  members  of  the  union,  and  that  the  most  substantial  recog- 
nition that  a  union  could  receive  was  the  payment  of  the  scale  of 
prices  previously  agreed  upon.  The  locals  were  therefore  ad- 
vised to  take  no  action  until  the  employer  undertook  to  introduce 
non-union  people  or  until  he  refused  to  pay  the  scale.  By  this 
policy  there  is  no  doubt  that  many  useless  strikes  were  avoided, 
as  in  many  cases  the  employers  were  glad  to  let  well  enough 
alone.25 

2*  For  accounts  of  strikes  of  this  kind  cf.  Stowell,  op.  tit.,  pp.  124-125, 
New  York  strike  of  1894;  p.  126,  strikes  in  Kansas  City,  Denver,  Bingham- 
ton,  N.Y.,  Milwaukee,  and  Cleveland,  1903-1904;  p.  127,  lockout  in  Los 
Angeles,  Cal.  The  following  communication  of  the  employers  to  the  tailors 
in  Kansas  City  in  1903  is  an  interesting  sample  of  an  employers'  "ulti- 
matum : ' ' 

"Believing  it  to  be  our  mutual  interest,  the  undersigned  merchant  tai- 
lors have  resolved  that  in  the  future  we  will  treat  with  our  men  as  individ- 
uals only,  and  employ  same  as  long  as  they  meet  our  requirements.  It  is 
not  our  motive  to  reduce  wages;  on  the  contrary,  we  will  pay  more  for  the 
highest  class  of  workmanship,  thereby  making  it  an  incentive  to  excel;  we 
decline  to  pay  as  much  for  poor  work  as  the  first-class  men  are  justly  en- 
titled to.  We  also  reserve  the  right  to  judge  the  class  to  which  it  belongs, 
and  to  place  the  jours  in  their  respective  grades.  We  decline  to  furnish 
back  shops,  as  past  experience  has  proven  them  to  be  a  detriment  to  the 
craft,  instead  of  a  help.  We  will  not  put  any  restrictions  on  our  men  as  to 
helpers,  as  we  deem  it  very  essential  to  the  trade  that  we  have  apprentices. ' ' 
The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  24. 

25  Cf.  The  Tailor,  October,  1902,  p.  12,  and  April,  1907,  p.  15,  editorials 
by  Secretary  Lennon. 


22  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [450 

(6)    The  Union  Shop 

For  purposes  of  this  discussion  a  terminology  is  employed 
which  is  coming  into  use  among  students  of  the  labor  question, 
and  which  endeavors  to  avoid  the  confusion  and  ambiguity  which 
has  frequently  attended  the  use  of  the  terms,  ' '  open  shop ' '  and 
"closed  shop."  Under  this  terminology  two  kinds  of  shops  are 
recognized,  the  "union  shop"  and  the  "non-union  shop."  The 
union  shop  is  said  to  exist  in  an  establishment  where  wages  and 
conditions  of  employment  for  all  employees  are  determined  by 
agreement  between  the  union  and  the  employer.  The  non-union 
shop  is  said  to  exist  in  an  establishment  in  which  wages  and  con- 
ditions are  determined  by  the  employer  without  consulting  the 
union.  The  above  definitions  being  given,  union  shops  are  sub- 
divided into  "closed  union  shops"  and  "open  union  shops,"  and 
non-union  shops  are  subdivided  into  "closed  non-union  shops" 
and  "open  non-union  shops."  The  "closed  union  shop"  is  held 
to  exist  in  establishments  where,  as  a  matter  of  agreement  be- 
tween the  employer  and  the  union,  none  but  union  members  can 
obtain  or  retain  employment.  This  represents  the  ideal  from 
the  trade  union  standpoint.  The  "closed  non-union  shop"  is 
held  to  exist  in  establishments  where,  by  reason  of  the  attitude 
or  policy  of  the  employer,  no  union  member  can  obtain  or  re- 
tain employment.  This  represents  the  ideal  from  the  standpoint 
of  employers  who  are  opposed  to  unionism.  Between  the  two 
extremes  are  the  "open  union  shop"  and  the  "open  non-union 
shop."  In  the  "open  union  shop"  wages  and  conditions  of 
labor  are  regulated  by  agreement  with  the  union,  but  non- 
unionists  are  at  liberty  to  secure  employment,  and  to  retain  it, 
so  far  as  anything  in  the  agreement  is  concerned.  In  the  ' '  open 
non-union  shop ' '  wages  and  conditions  are  regulated  by  the  em- 
ployer without  consulting  the  union,  but  the  union  members 
are  at  liberty  to  secure  and  retain  employment,  so  far  as  any- 
thing in  the  policy  of  the  employer  is  concerned. 

It  is  obvious  from  the  above  discussion  that  the  force  which 
prevents  the  non-unionists  from  working  in  a  closed  union  shop 
is  the  strength  of  the  union,  manifested  by  its  ability  to  secure  a 
closed  shop  clause  in  the  agreement,  and  to  enforce  the  same; 
while  the  force  that  prevents  the  unionist  from  working  in  a 


451]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  23 

closed  non-union  shop  is  the  power  of  hiring  and  discharge  on 
the  part  of  the  employer. 

Shops  of  all  four  kinds  are  found  in  the  custom  tailoring  trade, 
but  a  majority  are  union  shops,  open  or  closed,  and  open  non- 
union shops.  Only  a  few  shops  have  come  to  the  writer's  atten- 
tion where  unionists  are  excluded  altogether  by  action  of  the 
employer,  although  there  are  some  shops  where  they  are  ex- 
cluded by  action  of  the  union.26  The  tailors,  like  other  unions, 
have  been  obliged  to  face  an  ' '  open  shop ' '  movement  on  the  part 
of  the  employers.  As  already  explained,27  where  this  movement 
consisted  simply  of  talk,  the  executive  officers  of  the  union  have 
advised  that  it  be  overlooked  altogether.  Where,  however,  the 
employers  have  carried  the  matter  to  the  point  of  a  lockout  or  a 
refusal  altogether  to  deal  with  the  union,  the  Tailors,  as  already 
noted,28  have  resisted  vigorously  and  have  become  involved  in 
some  serious  conflicts. 

The  danger  of  trouble  with  the  employers  over  the  union  shop 
question  has  been  met  in  part  by  a  diplomatic  attitude  on  the 
part  of  the  unions.  They  have  recognized  that  a  demand  upon 
an  employer  to  sign  a  closed  shop  agreement  is  generally  irritat- 
ing, and  they  have  not  always  insisted  upon  a  closed  shop  clause 
in  their  agreements.29  The  Tailors  have  relied  upon  the  strength 
of  the  organization  rather  than  upon  the  written  agreement  to 
get  everybody  in  the  shop  into  the  union.  The  principle  has 
been  repeatedly  laid  down  by  their  officers,  that  a  weak  union 
cannot  enforce  a  closed  shop,  even  with  a  written  agreement, 
but  a  strong  union  can  enforce  a  closed  shop  without  a  written 
agreement.  It  is  true  that  many  of  the  Tailors'  agreements 
specify  that  only  union  men  shall  be  employed,  and  wherever 
the  employer  desires  the  use  of  the  label,  this  condition  is  always 
understood,  either  expressly  or  tacitly.  But  where  the  employer 
for  any  reason  objects  to  a  closed  shop  clause  in  the  agreement, 

26  In  both  cases  the  exclusion  of  unionists  is  usually  the  result  of  a  strike 
or  lockout  which  has  been  lost  by  the  union,  and  which  has  left  consider- 
able bitterness  of  feeling  on  both  sides. 

27  Supra,  p.  21. 

28  Supra,  p.  20. 

29  The  model  agreement  approved  by  the  Tailors'  Union  says  nothing 
whatever  about  the  employment  of  union  men  only. 


24  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS '  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [452 

the  national  officers  of  the  Tailors'  Union  have  ordinarily  ad- 
vised the  local  union  to  accept  the  agreement  without  this  clause, 
provided  all  other  terms  were  satisfactory.  And  where  a  strike 
has  been  in  progress,  in  which  the  closed  shop  agreement  was  one 
of  the  demands,  if  a  settlement  of  all  other  demands  could  be 
secured,  the  local  union  has  been  advised  to  waive  the  closed 
shop  demand. 

The  aim  has  been  in  all  cases  to  get  the  non-unionists  into  the 
union  with  the  least  possible  friction  with  the  employer,  and  the 
strike  against  the  non-unionist  has  been  employed  only  as  a  last 
resort.  When,  however,  it  became  evident  that  one  or  more  non- 
unionists  who  had  obtained  work  in  a  shop  hitherto  solidly  union 
were  not  going  to  join  voluntarily,  there  has  been  no  hesitation 
on  the  part  of  the  national  officers  in  supporting  the  local  union 
in  striking,  if  necessary,  for  the  purpose  of  getting  the  non- 
unionists  either  into  the  union,  or  out  of  the  shop.  It  was 
formerly  the  custom  in  such  cases  to  demand  from  the  employer 
the  discharge  of  the  offending  employees,  unless  they  joined  the 
union,  but  after  such  action  had  been  construed  by  some  of  the 
courts  as  conspiracy,  the  union  found  it  necessary  to  confine 
itself  to  notifying  the  employer  that  the  unionists  did  not  care 
to  work  with  the  men  in  question.  This,  of  course,  left  him  his 
choice  between  the  union  men  and  the  non-union  men,  and  if 
orders  were  coming  in  rapidly  the  employer  ordinarily  induced 
the  non-unionists  to  join,  and  in  some  cases  even  went  so  far  as 
to  pay  their  initiation  fees.  The  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the 
union  was  prepared  to  strike  if  necessary  has  often  been  suffi- 
cient to  bring  the  non-unionists  in  without  further  trouble. 

In  this  connection  it  should  be  observed  that  the  regulations 
of  the  Tailors'  Union  on  the  subject  of  the  union  shop  affect 
mainly  journeymen  tailors  capable  of  working  for  the  best 
stores,  employing  the  old  system  of  production,  because  it  is  in 
this  class  of  stores  in  the  main  that  the  union  has  maintained  its 
influence. 

An  investigation  made  in  1911  showed  that  in  65  cities  report- 
ing,30 there  were  1,239  merchant  tailoring  establishments  of  the 

30  Replies  to  the  questionnaire  were  received  from  73  cities,  but  only  65 
covered  both  the  item  of  union  shops  and  the  item  of  union  membership. 
The  eight  cities  not  reporting  on  both  of  these  items  were  New  York,  Chi- 


453]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  25 

kind  organized  by  the  Tailors'  Union,  and  of  these  378,  or  30.5 
per  cent,  were  union  shops.  In  the  same  cities  it  was  reported 
that  there  were  6,074  tailors  eligible  to  membership,  and  of  these 
2,640,  or  43.5  per  cent,  were  union  members.  The  fact  that  the 
percentage  of  union  members  is  larger  than  the  percentage  of 
union  shops  is  probably  to  be  explained  on  the  ground  that  the 
union  has  organized  more  large  shops  than  small  ones.  A  num- 
ber of  small  shops,  where  the  proprietor  employs  no  journeymen, 
and  is  not  himself  a  union  member,  are  not  organized  at  all.  It 
is  evident  from  these  figures  that  in  the  cities  reporting  the  union 
controlled  less  than  half  of  the  tailors,  and  somewhat  less  than 
one-third  of  the  shops;  but  from  various  sources  the  writer  is 
informed  that,  if  the  finest  stores  and  the  most  skilled  journey- 
men are  considered,  the  percentage,  both  of  journeymen  tailors 
and  of  shops,  controlled  by  the  union  is  considerably  higher.31 
The  percentage  in  both  respects  is  also  higher  in  small  cities 
than  in  large  ones.  In  thirty  cities  of  less  than  25,000  popula- 
tion, it  was  reported  in  1911  that  there  were  627  tailors  eligible 
to  membership,  of  whom  530,  or  84  per  cent,  were  in  the  unions ; 
and  in  the  same  cities  it  was  reported  that  there  were  150  mer- 

cago,  San  Francisco,  Seattle,  St.  Paul,  Troy,  Peoria,  and  Manitowoe.  For 
the  returns  in  detail,  cf.  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  pp.  140-143,  147.  For  explanation 
of  method  and  probable  accuracy  of  the  investigation,  cf.  ibid.,  pp.  132-134, 
145. 

si  A  pamphlet  published  by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  in  1911, 
entitled,  "Manufacturers  Using  Labels  of  Unions  affiliated  with  the  Union 
Label  Trades  Department  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,"  gives  a 
list  of  693  establishments  in  the  United  States  and  Canada  entitled  to  use 
the  Journeymen  Tailors'  label,  and  actually  using  it.  In  the  72  cities 
covered  by  the  writers'  investigations,  his  figures  indicate  546  union  shops, 
while  in  the  same  cities,  the  A.  F.  of  L.  pamphlet  indicates  276  label 
establishments.  The  terms  "union  shop"  and  "label  establishment"  are 
nearly  coextensive,  but  not  quite;  all  label  establishments  must  be  union 
shops,  but  not  all  union  shops  actually  use  the  label,  as  customers  and  em- 
ployers sometimes  object  to  its  use.  The  A.  F.  of  L,  pamphlet  does  not 
indicate  the  methods  employed  for  assembling  the  information  therein  con- 
tained, but  it  seems  probable  that  it  is  based  upon  incomplete  returns  from 
the  cities  considered. 

To  those  familiar  with  the  relative  quality  of  the  stores  in  any  locality, 
the  A.  F.  of  L.  pamphlet  will  be  found  useful  for  examining  the  con- 
clusion, that  the  best  stores  are  more  thoroughly  organized  by  the  Tailors' 
Union  than  those  of  a  lower  grade. 


26  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [454 

chant  tailoring  establishments,  of  which  118,  or  79  per  cent, 
were  union  shops.  In  twelve  cities  of  more  than  100,000  pop- 
ulation,32 it  was  reported  that  there  were  4,459  tailors  eligible  to 
membership,  of  whom  1,372,  or  31  per  cent,  were  in  the  unions ; 
and  in  the  same  cities  it  was  reported  that  there  were  901  mer- 
chant tailoring  establishments,  of  which  138,  or  15  per  cent, 
were  union  shops.  To  explain  fully  the  differences  in  these  re- 
spects between  large  and  small  cities  would  require  a  more  com- 
plete knowledge  of  the  conditions  in  each  city  than  that  which  is 
at  present  available.  In  general,  however,  the  difficulty  of  effec- 
tive organization  in  the  large  cities  is  explained:  (a)  by  the 
greater  territory  to  be  covered;  (b)  by  the  large  number  of  im- 
migrant tailors,  who  either  are  not  familiar  with  conservative 
trade  union  methods  or  are  not  in  sympathy  with  them;  (c)  by 
the  fact  that  many  of  the  skilled  tailors  in  the  large  cities  are 
virtually  contractors,  employing  a  number  of  helpers;  these 
tailors  were  kept  out  of  the  union  by  the  one  helper  rule,  when 
this  rule  was  in  force,  and  furthermore,  being  more  than  half 
employers,  they  lack  the  unity  of  interest  necessary  to  the  forma- 
tion of  a  successful  union.  Some  of  the  local  conditions  that  ac- 
count for  the  low  per  cent  of  organization  in  certain  specific 
cities  are  :  (a)  the  drift  of  the  trade  to  fashion  centers,  such  as 
New  York  and  Boston;  (b)  the  effect  of  unfortunate  strikes;  (c) 
the  neglect  of  the  union  in  some  cities  to  pay  attention  to  any 
but  the  best  stores. 

Concluding  the  discussion  of  the  shop  question,  it  should  be 
noted  that  among  journeymen  tailors  the  regulations  of  the  un- 
ion are  familiar ;  these  tailors  do  not  as  a  rule  expect  to  get  work 
in  a  union  shop  unless  they  keep  up  their  union  membership, 
and  if  they  have  fallen  out  of  benefit,  or  have  never  been  mem- 
bers, they  generally  square  themselves  with  the  union  without 
trouble.  The  duty  of  keeping  watch  over  the  interests  of  the 
union  in  this  respect  devolves  upon  a  member  in  each  shop 
known  as  the  shop  steward,  who  collects  the  dues  and  sees  that 
new  tailors  are  brought  into  the  union.  The  terms  of  the  union 
are  not  onerous ;  the  initiation  fee  is  low,33  there  is  practically  no 

32  Boston,  Cleveland,  Baltimore,  Pittsburgh,  Buffalo,  Milwaukee,  Kansas 
City,  Indianapolis,  Portland,  Atlanta,  Winnipeg,  Lowell. 

as  $2.00,  unless  the  candidate  was  formerly  a  member,  in  which  case  he 
must  pay  $6.00. 


455]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  27 

discrimination  (with  the  exception  of  some  unions  that  bar  ne- 
gro tailors)  except  for  offenses  against  the  union,  and  the  new- 
comer is  allowed  to  go  to  work  in  the  shop  and  if  necessary  to 
wait  until  he  gets  his  first  wages  before  he  is  obliged  to  pay  his 
initiation  fee  and  his  first  month's  dues.  The  Tailors'  Union 
has  had,  therefore,  comparatively  little  difficulty  in  maintaining 
the  union  shop  principle,  where  once  established,  except  in  those 
cases  where  the  employers  have  broken  with  the  union  and  delib- 
erately endeavored  to  fill  their  shops  with  non-union  men. 

(c)    Wages 

The  wage  agreement  or  price  bill.  The  employees  of  tailor 
shops  include  both  piece  and  time  workers.  An  investigation 
made  in  1911  showed  that  of  5,084  union  members  in  69  cities 
(representing  41  per  cent  of  the  total  membership  and  22  per 
cent  of  all  local  unions)  3,970  were  employed  on  the  piece  sys- 
tem, and  1,114  on  the  weekly  system.34  Of  the  employees  work- 
ing on  the  weekly  system,  a  majority  are  bushelmen.  The  bal- 
ance are  employed  chiefly  in  shops  which  have  adopted  the 
weekly  system  for  all  employees;  although  some  are  in  shops 
where  the  piece  system  is  retained  for  the  skilled  journeymen, 
but  one  or  more  pressers  or  finishers  are  employed  by  the  week. 
In  a  majority  of  shops,  therefore,  the  wage  agreements  contain 
(1)  piece  scales,  (2)  time  scales. 

(1)  Piece  scales.  The  Tailors  belong  in  that  group  of  unions 
which  ' '  work  under  scales  which  attempt  to  cover,  by  descriptive 
enumeration,  every  type  or  pattern  for  which  a  distinct  rate  is 
to  be  paid. " 35  It  is  not  proposed  to  discuss  all  of  the  tech- 
nicalities of  tailors'  bills  of  prices.36  There  are  three  matters, 
however,  that  require  particular  attention:  (a)  classification  of 
materials,  (b)  classification  of  firms,  (c)  payment  of  helpers. 

(a)   Classification  of  materials.     There  are  two  reasons  for 

s*C/.  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  pp.  151-155,  157. 

ss  D.  A.  McCabe,  The  Standard  Bate  in  American  Trade  Unions,  p.  35. 
McCabe  includes  in  this  group,  besides  the  Tailors,  the  Glass  Bottle  Blow- 
ers, the  Flint  Glass  Workers,  the  Operative  Potters,  the  shirt  and  overall 
workers  in  the  United  Garment  Workers,  and  the  stove  molders  in  the 
Holders'  Union. 

36  The  reader  who  is  interested  can  obtain  a  good  idea  of  a  tailors '  bill 
of  prices  from  the  model  agreement  and  the  report  of  the  committee  who 
recommended  the  same.  Cf.  The  Tailor,  August,  1905,  pp.  1-4. 


28  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [456 

the  classification  of  materials  for  purposes  of  determining  piece 
rates;  first,  the  fact  that  some  materials  enter  into  the  more  ex- 
pensive suits,  while  others  enter  into  the  cheaper  suits;  and 
second,  the  fact  that  some  materials  are  harder  for  the  tailor  to 
work  on  than  others.  The  model  agreement  of  the  Tailors'  Un- 
ion contains  two  classes  of  materials,  as  follows: 

First  class  goods:  Basket,  beaver,  birdseye,  chinchilla,  cravenett,  covert 
cloth,  crepe,  corkscrew,  diagonals,  drap-te-ete,  doeskin,  elysians,  fancy  vest- 
ings,  frieze,  kersey,  melton,  montagnac  pique,  pilot,  petershams,  ribs,  silk, 
stockinetts,  tricot,  unfinished  worsteds,  velvet,  Venetians,  vicuna,  worsted, 
whip  cord. 

Second  class  goods:  Alpaca,  cassimere,  cheviot,  corduroy,  duck,  flannel, 
jeans,  linen,  marseilles,  mohair,  seersucker,  serge,  tweed,  thibit,  velveteen, 
wool  crash,  wash  vestings. 

The  goods  listed  in  the  first  class  are  those  which  are  ordinarily 
used  for  the  higher  priced  garments;  they  are  also  of  a  rela- 
tively compact  and  hard  texture,  making  them  harder  to  sew 
and  press.  The  goods  in  the  second  class  are  of  a  softer  and 
looser  texture,  and  enter  into  the  moderate  priced  garments.37 
The  model  agreement  is  not  compulsory,  and  some  local  unions 
have  only  one  class  of  materials  in  their  bills,  but  where  they 
have  the  two  classes,  the  piece  rate  is  higher  for  the  first  class 
than  for  the  second.  The  model  agreement  does  not  contemplate 
the  setting  of  two  prices  for  every  kind  of  garment.  There  are 
some  garments  which  are  intended  to  be  listed  as  first  class, 
regardless  of  material ;  for  example,  dress  coats,  vests  and  trou- 
sers, Tuxedos,  frock  coats,  new  market  overcoats  and  surtouts. 

(b)  Classification  of  firms.  In  cities  of  moderate  size  the 
same  bill  of  prices  is  usually  paid  in  all  of  the  establishments 
controlled  by  the  union.  But  in  large  cities,  where  there  are 
classes  of  stores,  some  handling  high  priced  garments  only,  while 

37  The  classification  of  goods  is  not  a  new  thing  in  the  tailoring  trade. 
Cf.  the  following  extract  from  the  speech  for  the  defense  in  a  trial  of  tai- 
lors for  conspiracy  in  Philadelphia  in  1827: 

"Distinctions  of  various  kinds  had  been  attempted  between  thick  and 
thin  clothing.  ...  To  put  an  end  to  such  altercations  a  specification  of 
prices  was  determined  on,  and  such  a  printed  document  prepared  as  would 
effectually  preclude  any  further  ambiguity."  The  Trial  of  Twenty-four 
Journeymen  Tailors,  charged  with  a  conspiracy.  Philadelphia,  1827.  Re- 
printed in  Documentary  History  of  American  Industrial  Society,  IV,  142- 
143. 


457]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  29 

others  handle  the  moderate  priced  and  lower  priced  garments, 
the  union  has  not  found  it  possible  to  secure  the  same  piece  rates 
in  all  the  stores,  and  has  accepted  a  lower  bill  in  some  stores  than 
in  others.  For  example,  in  New  York  City  the  various  bills  paid 
can  be  grouped  into  about  four  classes,  the  differences  in  piece 
rates  being  roughly  proportionate  to  the  differences  in  the  prices 
of  the  garments  sold  by  each  class  of  stores.  It  has  been  claimed 
on  behalf  of  the  tailors  that  they  recognized  more  thoroughly 
than  any  other  craft  the  principle  that  the  employer  should  not 
be  asked  to  pay  the  same  wage  to  workmen  of  different  grades 
of  ability,  and  employed  on  different  grades  of  work.38  Never- 
theless it  has  been  difficult  to  adjust  the  bills  in  different  stores 
in  a  way  satisfactory  to  the  merchant  tailors,  the  complaint  be- 
ing that  journeymen  worked  on  a  given  grade  of  clothing  for  one 
firm  at  one  rate  and  on  the  same  grade  of  clothing  for  another 
firm  at  a  lower  rate.  The  most  satisfactory  results  have  been 
secured  in  those  cities  where  it  was  possible  to  make  the  bill  uni- 
form in  all  the  union  stores. 

(c)  Payment  of  helpers.  Where  a  journeyman  tailor  works 
with  help,  the  helper  is  paid  by  the  journeyman,  and  not  by  the 
employer.  The  usual  rule  is  that  the  helper  gets  one-third  of 
the  price  of  the  job,  and  the  tailor  two-thirds.  On  this  system 
it  is  obvious  that  the  helper  will  share  in  any  increase  in  piece 
wages  secured  by  the  journeyman.  However,  in  order  to  give 

ss  ' '  Our  unions  are  severely  criticized  for  maintaining  a  minimum  bill  of 
prices,  the  merchant  tailors  harping,  a  few  of  them  at  any  rate,  on  the  old 
worn-out  statement  that  all  men  are  not  equally  capable  and  are  therefore 
not  entitled  to  the  same  compensation.  We  have  never  denied  this  claim, 
and  do  not  deny  it.  We  fix  a  minimum  scale  to  cover  the  average  journey- 
man, and  if  there  are  men  of  special  expertness  the  merchant  tailor  has 
always  been  at  liberty  to  pay  as  much  more  than  the  scale  as  he  pleases, 
and  not  only  is  this  true,  but  as  is  the  case  in  no  other  industry  we  present 
different  price  bills  to  different  establishments.  The  store  requiring  the 
finest  work  and  the  finest  workmen  is  asked  to  pay  the  highest  bill,  and 
those  requiring  less  skill,  we  do  not  require  them  to  pay  the  same  scale. 
This  gives  the  merchant  tailor  an  opportunity  to  employ  that  class  of  me- 
chanics that  are  needed  to  turn  out  his  trade.  I  know  of  no  other  craft  in 
which  this  principle  is  so  thoroughly  recognized  as  in  that  of  the  tailors. ' ' 
The  Tailor,  October,  1903,  p.  16,  editorial  on  "The  Trade  Union  and 
Business  Stability." 


30  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [458 

official  endorsement  to  this  principle,  a  constitutional  amend- 
ment was  submitted  and  passed  in  1907,  as  follows:39 

In  all  cases  where  helpers  are  employed  the  helpers  shall  participate  in 
all  increase  of  wages,  reduction  of  the  hours  of  labor,  etc.,  in  the  same 
proportion  as  the  journeyman  tailor  that  employs  them. 

(2)  Weekly  scales.  We  consider  (a)  weekly  scales  in  shops 
where  both  piece  workers  and  weekly  workers  are  employed;  (b) 
weekly  scales  in  shops  employing  the  weekly  system  exclusively. 
The  model  agreement,  which  is  drafted  for  case  (a),  contains 
the  following  provisions  which  are  of  importance  in  this  con- 
nection: 

All  extras  not  mentioned  in  this  bill  shall  be  paid  for  at  the  rate  of  not 
less  than cents  per  hour. 

Bushelling  by  the  hour  shall  not  be  less  than cents. 

Bushelmen  's  wages  shall  not  be  less  than dollars  a  week ;  working 

day  shall  not  be  more  than  ten  hours. 

But  the  model  agreement  provides  for  exclusive  weekly  agree- 
ments if  the  local  unions  desire: 

The  adoption  of  this  piece  price  bill  shall  not  be  construed  as  prohibiting 
any  Local  Union  from  making  an  agreement  to  make  all  work  by  the  week 
in  accord  with  our  constitution. 

There  are  a  few  localities  where  a  large  part  of  the  work  is 
made  on  the  weekly  system.  For  example,  in  1911  it  was  found 
that  about  one-half  of  the  members  of  the  Seattle  union,  and 
about  forty  per  cent  of  the  members  of  the  San  Francisco  un- 
ion, were  working  by  the  week.  The  present  union  scale  for 
weekly  workers  in  Seattle  is  as  follows:40 

Coats 

Per  Week 

Tailors    $25.00 

Operators   25.00 

Operator 's  assistant 18.00 

Pressers    25.00 

Presser's  assistant 18.00 

Buttonhole   maker 18.00 

First-class  finisher 16.00 

Second-class    finisher 14.00 

Try-on  maker    18.00 

39  The  Tailor,  September,  1907,  p.  16,  Proposition  No.  1. 

40  The  Tailor,  April  10,  1917,  p.  3.    Other  details  of  the  union  agreement 
for  weekly  workers  in  Seattle,  and  a  description  of  the  diverse  methods  of 
producing  clothing  in  that  city,  may  be  found  in  the  same  issue. 


459]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  31 

Vests 

Operator    22.00 

Operator 's  assistant 16.00 

Presser    22.00 

Presser's  assistant 18.00 

Buttonhole  maker  16.00 

Finisher 12.00 

Trousers 

Operator   22.00 

Operator 's  assistant 16.00 

Presser    22.00 

Presser 's  assistant 18.00 

First-class  finisher 14.00 

Second-class  finisher 12.00 

BusTwlmen 

Bushelman    25.00 

Bushelman  'a  assistant 22.00 

A  curious  combination  of  the  time  and  piece  systems  of 
payment  is  found  in  the  "time  logs"  which  are  in  use  in  some 
localities  in  Canada.  In  a  time  log  each  piece  is  standardized 
at  so  many  hours,  the  hourly  rate  being  constant. 

Wage  policy  of  union,  (a)  Reductions.  It  has  been  the  uni- 
form policy  of  the  Tailors'  Union  to  resist  reductions  whenever 
offered.  There  has  been  no  deviation  from  this  policy  except  in 
times  of  extreme  industrial  depression.  In  resisting  reductions 
the  union  has  met  with  a  high  degree  of  success,  and  it  has  been 
found  necessary  to  accept  few  reductions,  except  during  panic 
times. 

(b)  Increases.  Considerable  discretion  has  been  exercised  by 
the  Tailors'  Executive  Board  in  the  matter  of  supporting  de- 
mands for  increased  wages.  It  has  been  their  rule  for  a  number 
of  years  to  require  from  local  unions  desiring  to  raise  their 
price  bills  a  copy  of  the  bill  already  paid,  as  well  as  a  copy  of 
the  bill  which  it  is  desired  to  present  to  the  employers,  so  that 
the  board  can  see  directly  the  amount  of  the  increase  demanded. 
The  board  has  never  placed  obstacles  in  the  way  of  any  local 
union's  obtaining  as  large  an  increase  as  possible  by  peaceable 
negotiations,  but  when  it  has  been  evident  that  a  strike  would 
be  necessary,  the  board  has  usually  required  that  the  local  union 
should  not  demand  more  than  a  ten  per  cent  increase ;  and  the 
locals  have  been  strongly  urged  to  accept  a  compromise  of  less 


32  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS '  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [460 

than  this  amount,  rather  than  to  strike.  Care  has  also  been  taken 
to  present  bills  at  the  beginning  of  the  good  seasons,  when  the 
employers  are  rushed  with  orders  and  can  least  afford  a  strike. 
These  policies  have  been  followed  quite  consistently,  with  the 
result  that  a  very  large  part  of  the  demands  made  by  the  local 
unions  have  been  settled  on  a  satisfactory  basis  without  strikes. 
Where  strikes  have  been  necessary,  a  large  per  cent  have  suc- 
ceeded, and,  as  a  rule,  the  gains  made  have  been  permanent. 

Results  of  wage  policy.  With  reference  to  the  actual  accom- 
plishments of  the  Tailors'  Union  in  the  matter  of  wages,  there 
are  several  questions  which  naturally  arise: 

(1)  What  are  the  average  yearly  earnings  of  tailors  at  the 
present  time:    (a)    of  coatmakers,    (b)    of  vestmakers,    (c)    of 
trousersmakers,  (d)  of  bushelmen  or  other  journeymen  employed 
by  the  week,  (e)  of  helpers? 

(2)  What  has  been  the  per  cent  of  increase  or  decrease  in 
tailor's  piece  rates  over  any  given  period  of  years? 

(3)  Have  the  annual  earnings  of  tailors  changed  in  the  same 
proportion  as  their  piece  wages? 

(4)  To  what  extent  have  increases  been  due  to  the  activities 
of  tailors'  unions,  and  to  what  extent  to  other  causes? 

(5)  Have  increases  in  wages  kept  pace  with  the  increase  in 
the  prices  of  commodities  ordinarily  consumed  by  workmen  of 
the  same  general  standard  of  living  as  the  tailors? 

(6)  Have  the  wages  of  tailors  kept  pace  with  those  of  other 
workmen  of  the  same  general  preparation  and  skill? 

It  is  obvious  that  all  of  the  above  questions  may  be  applied 
to  specified  localities  or  districts,  or  to  the  country  as  a  whole. 
The  extraordinary  diversity  of  the  conditions  41  under  which  the 

41  In  addition  to  the  differences  in  skill  and  speed  of  work,  which  affect 
the  wages  of  piece  workers  in  all  trades,  it  must  be  noted  that  some  tailors 
are  working  in  free  shops,  some  in  rented  shops  and  some  at  home;  some  on 
expensive  clothing  and  some  on  cheap  clothing,  and  of  these,  some  receiving 
the  same  piece  wages,  regardless  of  the  price  of  the  garment,  while  others 
receive  a  classified  scale,  the  basis  of  classification,  moreover,  not  being 
uniform;  the  specifications  for  each  garment  are  subject  to  a  great  many 
minor  variations,  or  ' '  extras, ' '  for  which  payment  differs  in  different  locali- 
ties; the  establishments  are  in  all  stages  of  "industrial  evolution;"  some 
tailors  are  working  in  union  towns,  and  some  in  non-union ;  the  predomi- 
nating nationalities,  and  corresponding  standards  of  living,  vary  greatly  as 
between  different  localities;  some  tailors  work  with  help,  and  some  without, 


461]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  33 

tailors  of  North  America  are  working  renders  impossible  any 
answer  to  the  above  questions  which  can  be  supported  by  statis- 
tical data  at  hand.  All  that  can  be  done  is  to  present  the  writ- 
er's impressions,  secured  from  various  sources,42  and  advanced 
with  the  utmost  reservation  as  to  their  probable  accuracy. 

Upon  the  first  topic,  yearly  earnings  of  tailors,  the  different 
crafts  stand  usually  in  the  following  order  as  to  the  amount  of 
their  yearly  earnings:  bushelmen,  coatmakers,  trousersmakers, 
vestmakers,  helpers.  Only  a  few  tailors  of  any  craft  earn  more 
than  $1000  a  year,  while  it  is  not  probable  that  many  helpers, 
unless  they  purposely  lose  time,  earn  less  than  $200  a  year.  The 
average  wages  of  bushelmen  the  country  over  are  probably 
about  $800  a  year.  The  average  annual  wages  of  coatmakers, 
vestmakers  and  trousersmakers,  considered  as  a  group,  lie  prob- 
ably between  $600  and  $800.  Coatmakers  may  average  $750, 
trousersmakers  $700,  and  vestmakers  $600.  Helpers  average 
probably  $350. 

On  the  second  question,  increase  or  decrease  of  piece  rates,  it 
may  be  said  with  certainty  that  only  a  few  local  unions  have 
been  obliged  to  accept  permanent  reductions  since  they  entered 
the  national  union,  and  that  practically  all  local  unions  have  in- 
creased their  piece  rates.  The  increases  have  usually  taken 
place  at  intervals  of  from  two  to  five  years  for  any  given  union, 
and  have  averaged  probably  five  per  cent  each  time.  It  is  be- 
lieved that  this  statement  will  apply  to  a  majority  of  the  local 
unions.  A  more  general  or  exact  statement  is  impossible.  In 
1883,  when  the  present  national  union  was  organized,  it  is  prob- 
able that  many  local  unions  existing  prior  to  that  date  had  not 
yet  recovered  from  the  demoralizing  effects  of  the  panic  of  1873. 

and  where  they  work  with  help,  the  number  of  helpers  varies,  and  the  situ- 
ation is  further  complicated  by  the  fact  that  in  many  cases  the  helpers  are 
members  of  the  tailors'  own  families;  employment  is  seasonal  and  exceed- 
ingly irregular,  and  the  hours  of  labor  completely  without  standardization, 
except  in  a  few  establishments  employing  the  weekly  system,  and  in  a  few 
cities  where  the  local  unions  have  undertaken  to  limit  the  hours  of  piece 
workers. 

42  The  writer  'a  impressions  are  based  upon  data  in  reports  of  state 
bureaus  of  labor;  upon  returns  received  from  a  questionnaire  sent  out  in 
1911  to  secretaries  of  local  unions;  upon  the  observation  of  union  officers, 
and  upon  his  own  observation  while  employed  in  the  general  headquarters 
of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union. 


34  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [462 

At  any  rate,  it  is  known  that  a  great  many  local  unions,  on 
joining  the  national,  secured  very  shortly  an  increase  in  their 
price  bills,  and  increased  them  further  from  time  to  time  as 
indicated.  An  effort  was  made  in  1911  to  secure  exact  data  on 
this  point,  but  the  returns  were  not  sufficiently  definite  or  com- 
prehensive to  be  of  value. 

To  answer  the  third  question,  it  would  be  necessary  to  know 
whether  there  has  been  a  change  in  the  average  number  of  pieces 
that  a  skilled  tailor,  working  by  the  piece  on  the  old  system,  gets 
each  year.  This  question  in  turn  requires  a  knowledge  of  the 
amount  of  work  available  and  of  the  number  of  skilled  tailors.  As 
for  the  amount  of  work  available  for  ' '  old-line ' '  tailors,  there  is 
no  doubt  in  the  writer's  mind  that  it  has  decreased  during  the  life 
of  the  present  national  union,  on  account  of  the  competition  of 
cheaper  methods  of  producing  clothing.  As  for  the  number  of 
skilled  tailors,  it  is  less  easy  to  trace  changes  in  this  respect.  As 
we  shall  see  in  another  connection,43  it  is  generally  admitted  that 
the  number  of  tailors  capable  of  doing  the  highest  grade  of  work 
on  the  individual  system  has  declined,  and  it  is  possible  that  it 
has  declined  sufficiently  to  give  each  tailor  of  this  grade  now  em- 
ployed as  many  pieces  as  he  would  have  obtained,  say,  thirty 
years  ago.  However,  if  all  journeymen  tailors  are  considered, 
it  is  the  writer's  opinion  that  their  number  has  not  declined  in 
the  same  proportion  as  the  work  to  be  done  (i.  e.,  the  work  to  be 
done  on  the  old  individual  system),  and  that  upon  the  whole 
the  average  number  of  pieces  to  each  journeyman  is  less  than  it 
was  thirty  years  ago.  If  this  is  true,  the  average  annual  earn- 
ings of  journeymen  tailors  have  not  increased  in  the  same  pro- 
portion as  their  piece  rates.** 

43  Infra,  pp.  78-81. 

**  If  only  native  tailors  were  to  be  considered,  the  number  would  prob- 
ably be  adjusted  so  that  each  would  get  about  the  same  number  of  pieces 
from  year  to  year.  The  effect  of  a  reduction  in  the  amount  of  work  to  be 
done  in  a  union  shop  is  first  to  give  a  less  number  of  pieces  each  season  to 
each  of  the  permanent  employees,  inasmuch  as  they  work  under  a  turn-list; 
but  after  a  time  some  retire  and  are  not  replaced,  and  the  average  number 
of  pieces  which  the  others  get  tends  to  be  the  same  as  before.  The  training 
of  apprentices  being  under  the  control  of  the  journeymen,  the  number  of 
apprentices  will  probably  be  adjusted  to  the  same  end.  But  there  is  a 
"floating  element"  of  tailors,  consisting  largely  of  immigrants  who  have 
learned  their  trade  abroad,  who  obtain  employment  during  the  rush  seasons, 


463]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  35 

The  fourth  question  would  be  difficult  to  answer,  even  with 
comprehensive  wage  data,  and  no  attempt  is  made  to  answer  it 
here.  The  fifth  question  obviously  involves  the  first  three;  the 
opinion  is  expressed,  that  even  without  considering  the  recent 
period  of  abnormally  high  prices,  the  increase  in  tailors'  wages 
has  fallen  a  little  short  of  the  increase  in  the  prices  of  commodi- 
ties ordinarily  consumed  by  tailors  and  their  families.  Finally, 
it  is  believed  that  the  wages  of  tailors  are  about  equal  to  those 
of  the  least  prosperous  of  the  skilled  building  trades,  and  some- 
what short  of  the  wages  of  the  printing  trades  and  of  the  better 
paid  building  trades. 

(d)    Hours  of  Labor 

One  of  the  most  difficult  of  all  reforms  attempted  by  the 
Tailors'  Union  has  been  the  regulation  of  the  hours  of  labor. 
The  fundamental  obstacle  to  regulating  hours  has  been  the  sea- 
sonal character  of  the  trade.  At  certain  seasons  of  the  year, 
notably  the  spring  and  fall,  orders  for  custom  clothing  are  numer- 
ous, and  in  most  cases  the  customer  is  in  a  hurry  to  get  his  in- 
dividual order  completed.  At  other  seasons  trade  is  so  slack 
that  the  tailor  may  get  only  one  or  two  garments  to  make  dur- 
ing an  entire  month.  These  extremes  of  employment  have 
existed  in  the  tailoring  trade  from  the  earliest  times,45  and  have 

and  tend  to  cut  down  the  average  yearly  number  of  pieces  received  by  each 
journeyman;  and  this  element,  originating  at  a  distance  from  the  demand, 
is  not  adjusted  like  the  local  supply  of  labor. 

*5  The  London  Tradesman,  writing  of  the  journeymen  tailors  of  London 
in  the  year  1747,  says:  "They  are  as  numerous  as  locusts,  are  out  of  busi- 
ness about  three  or  four  months  in  the  year,  and  are  generally  as  poor  as 
rats."  Galton,  The  Tailoring  Trade,  p.  3,  footnote.  And  in  The  Pioneer, 
May  10,  1834,  in  the  course  of  "The  address  of  the  journeymen  tailors  of 
the  metropolis,"  appears  the  following: 

"The  men  working  at  home  are  scarcely  ever  able  to  earn  more  than  3 
shillings  6  pence  or  4  shillings  per  day,  with  the  assistance  often  of  their 
wives  and  children,  and  then,  as  I  have  before  stated,  only  when  they  can  get 
work  to  do.  Even  these  men,  working  in  this  manner  at  this  great  reduction, 
are  very  frequently  days,  nay,  months,  without  employment,  and  consequently 
without  pay.  If,  however,  an  order  comes  in  to  be  executed  immediately,  the 
journeyman  must  labor  night  and  day  to  accommodate  the  customer  and 
master,  and  make  every  sacrifice  of  health,  and  the  only  remaining  domestic 
comfort  on  such  occasions,  or  risk  the  chance  of  being  discharged  from  his 
shop  altogether.  In  the  spring  he  is  repeatedly  called  upon  to  make  these 
sacrifices;  but  all  the  other  parts  of  the  year  he  is  never  certain  of  one 


36  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS*  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [464 

made  the  standardization  of  hours  appear  to  be  almost  hopeless. 
Nevertheless  the  organized  tailors  have  not  at  any  time  aban- 
doned altogether  the  effort  to  improve  conditions  in  this  respect, 
and  it  is  to  this  effort,  however  unsuccessful,  that  our  attention 
must  now  be  directed. 

The  earliest  official  action  by  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union 
seems  to  have  been  taken  by  the  1884  convention,  which  declared : 
"We  believe  that  a  permanent  improvement  of  the  condition  of 
the  wage-working  class  cannot  be  effected  by  any  means  what- 
ever, unless  accompanied  by  a  reduction  in  the  hours  of  labor. ' ' 46 
This  resolution  was  reiterated  by  the  1885  and  1887  conven- 
tions.47 The  1889  and  1891  conventions  passed  resolutions 
favorable  to  reducing  hours,  and  approved  the  movement  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  for  an  eight-hour  day  in  all 
trades.48  The  1893  convention  condemned  the  long  hours  in  the 
trade,  and  called  upon  every  member  to  "do  all  in  his  power 
to  discourage  the  practice  of  working  long  hours,  and  wherever 
it  is  possible  to  strive  to  introduce  a  ten-hour  day. ' ' 49  The 
1897  committee  on  Jaws  and  audit  proposed,  and  it  was  ap- 
proved by  the  members,  that  after  April  1,  1899,  members  em- 
ployed in  free  workshops  should  observe  a  maximum  working 
day  of  ten  hours.  A  fine  of  one  dollar  was  provided  for  each  vi- 
olation.5*  In  support  of  this  amendment  it  was  argued  that  reduc- 
tion of  the  hours  of  labor  was  necessary  on  grounds  of  human- 
ity; that  it  would  increase  wages;  and  that  it  would  lengthen 
the  seasons,  putting  a  stop  to  "crowding  into  eight  or  ten  weeks 
the  work  that  should  be  spread  over  four  or  five  months. ' ' 51 

week's  constant  employment."  Beprinted  from  Galton,  in  The  Tailor,  Feb- 
ruary, 1904,  p.  6. 

4»  Constitution,  1884,  p.  13,  Resolution  No.  2. 

47  Constitution,  1885,  p.  4,  Resolution  No.  2 ;  1887,  p.  19,  Resolution  No.  2. 

48  Proceedings,  The  Tailor,  September,  1889,  and  August,  1891. 

4»  As  early  as  1889  some  of  the  local  unions  were  trying  to  enforce  the 
ten-hour  day.  The  Tailor,  September,  1889,  p.  1,  col.  4,  report  of  general 
oecretary  on  ' '  Less  hours  of  labor. ' ' 

so  The  Tailor,  August,  1897,  p.  16,  Proposition  No.  5.  In  printing  the 
new  constitution  the  Executive  Board  assumed  that  the  proposition  as 
passed  prohibited  Sunday  work,  although  the  language  used  was:  "Ten 
hours  per  day  shall  be  the  maximum  that  any  member  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A. 
shall  work  during  any  one  calendar  week  day."  For  amendment  as  finally 
printed,  see  Constitution,  1898,  Sec.  21. 

si  The  Tailor,  September,  1897,  p.  1. 


465]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  37 

The  section  setting  ten  hours  as  the  maximum  work  day  in 
free  shops  was  modified  in  1899  to  read:  "Ten  hours  per  day 
or  sixty  hours  per  week, ' ' 52  the  intention  being  apparently  to 
allow  the  members  to  choose  their  own  day  of  rest,  although  it 
was  open  also  to  the  construction,  that  overtime  would  be  allowed 
on  some  days,  if  made  up  by  working  less  on  others.  That  the 
latter  construction  was  not  intended  appears  from  an  amend- 
ment passed  in  1901,  making  the  section  read:53 

Ten  hours  per  day  shall  be  the  maximum  that  any  member  of  the  J.  T. 
U.  of  A.  shall  be  allowed  to  work  during  any  one  day. 

The  section  remained  in  this  shape  until  1905,  when  the  manda- 
tory feature  was  removed  altogether,  and  the  limitation  of  hours 
was  made  entirely  optional  with  the  local  unions.54  No  further 
change  was  made  until  the  1914  constitution,  when  all  reference 
to  hours  on  piece  work  was  dropped,  and  the  following  substi- 
tuted, which  is  the  rule  now  (January  1,  1917)  :55 

All  local  unions  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  must  have  a  provision  in  their 
agreement  limiting  the  hours  of  labor  to  not  more  than  eight  hours,  for 
day  and  week  work,  with  extra  pay  for  overtime,  and  no  new  agreements 
shall  be  sanctioned  by  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  without  such  provisions. 

The  number  of  unions  enforcing  the  limitation  of  hours  of 
piece  workers  was  reported  on  three  dates,  August,  1899,  March, 
1900,  and  January,  1912.  On  the  first  date  29  local  unions  out 
of  a  total  of  151  were  enforcing  the  ten-hour  work  day,56  and  on 
the  second  date,  25  local  unions  out  of  a  total  of  186.57  On  the 
third  date,  73  local  unions  out  of  308  reported,  and  of  these, 
only  ten  were  limiting  the  hours  of  piece  workers.58  In  this 

52  The  Tailor,  August,  1899,  p.  16,  Proposition  No.  3.  Constitution,  1900, 
Sec.  21. 

sa  The  Tailor,  August,  1901,  p.  19,  Proposition  No.  4.  Constitution,  1902, 
Sec.  21;  1904,  Sec.  22. 

54  < '  The  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  shall  endeavor  by  all  means  in  their  power  to 
reduce  the  hours  of  labor,  and  such  local  unions  as  shall  by  a  two-thirds 
majority  decide  to  limit  the  hours  of  labor  shall  be  supported  in  such  action 
by  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A."  Constitution,  1905,  Sec.  22;  1908,  Sec.  21;  1910, 
Sec.  21. 

ss  Constitution,  1914,  See.  11.  This  rule  does  not  mean  that  everybody 
must  work  by  the  day  or  week,  but  means  that  where  tailors  are  employed 
by  the  day  or  week,  the  agreement  must  provide  for  an  eight-hour  day. 

so  General  secretary's  report  to  1899  committee.  The  Tailor,  August, 
1899,  p.  7. 

s?  The  Tailor,  March,  1900,  p.  7. 

ss  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  p.  158. 


38  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [466 

connection  it  should  be  noted  that  most  of  the  tailors'  unions 
have  succeeded  in  limiting  the  hours  of  weekly  workers  and 
bushelmen,  but  that  the  effort  to  regulate  the  hours  of  piece 
workers  has  been  an  almost  complete  failure,  except  in  a  very 
few  localities.  The  pressure  upon  the  tailors  to  make  up  in  the 
rush  seasons  for  the  loss  of  time  in  the  dull  seasons  is  so  great 
that  the  limitation  of  hours  is  practically  impossible. 

(e)    Workshops,  and  the  Piece  System 

Two  systems  may  be  distinguished  in  the  tailoring  trade,  with 
reference  to  the  place  where  the  tailor  does  his  work :  I.  The 
itinerant  system;  II.  The  shop  system. 

I.  The  itinerant  system.     On  this  system  the  journeyman 
tailor  works  in  the  customer's  home,  on  goods  furnished  by  the 
customer. 

II.  The  shop  system.    This  system  is  subdivided  as  follows: 

1.  Employer's  shop  system;  journeyman  works  in  a  shop 
furnished  by  the  employer,  either  free  of  charge,  or  with  a 
charge  for  ' '  seat-room. ' ' 59 

2.  Private  shop  system:  journeyman  owns  or  rents  shop, 
or  pays  for  "seat-room"  to  some  other  journeyman,  or  to  an 
association  of  journeymen  who  combine  to  secure  working 
quarters. 

3.  Home  work  system :  journeyman  works  in  his  own  home. 
In  all  variations  of  the  shop  system,  the  journeyman  works  on 

goods  furnished  by  the  employer,  and  the  garment  has  been  cut 
out  by  the  employer  or  cutter  before  the  journeyman  receives  it. 
When  tailors  work  in  private  shops  or  at  home,  they  furnish 
their  own  tools  and  machines,  and  in  many  cases  where  they 
work  in  employers'  shops,  they  supply  their  own  sewing  ma- 
chines, press  blocks  and  press  stands. 

The  information  necessary  for  writing  a  complete  history  of 
working  systems  in  the  tailoring  trade  is  not  at  hand,  but  from 
scattered  sources  it  appears  evident  that  historically  the  itinerant 
system  was  the  first  in  this  country,  and  that  the  shop  system  was 
in  the  first  instance  the  result  of  itinerant  tailors'  starting  shops 
of  their  own,  and  assuming  the  functions  of  merchants  as  well 
as  of  journeymen.  The  itinerant  system  and  the  shop  systems 

s»A  variation  on  this  system  is  the  contractor's  shop,  furnished  by  a 
contractor  who  is  a  middleman  between  the  merchant  and  the  journeyman. 


467]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  39 

appear  to  have  continued  side  by  side  for  a  number  of  years, 
until  gradually  the  itinerant  system  became  obsolete.60  The 
home  work  system,  while  undoubtedly  it  prevailed  in  England 
during  the  early  part  of  the  19th  century,61  and  was  probably 
used  as  early  in  this  country  by  women  engaged  on  finishing 
work,  appears  to  have  reached  its  greatest  development  in  the 
United  States  following  the  introduction  of  the  sewing  machine. 
Home  work  on  the  part  of  men  tailors  in  this  country  seems  to 
have  arisen  mainly  from  two  conditions:  (1)  the  journeymen 
could  make  a  larger  number  of  pieces  if  they  were  assisted  at 
home  by  their  wives  and  daughters;  (2)  by  working  at  home 
they  could  work  for  more  than  one  store,  and  in  that  way  get 
more  work  to  do,  especially  in  the  dull  seasons.  The  contract  sys- 
tem, or  ' '  sweating  system, "  as  it  is  called  in  the  trade,  lends  it- 
self peculiarly  to  home  work.  The  contractor  takes  the  work 
in  lots  from  the  merchant  tailors,  and  undertakes  to  get  it  made 
anywhere  he  can,  and  frequently  this  means  that  it  is  done  in 
the  tailors'  homes.  This  system  had  grown  up  in  all  large  cities 
by  the  time  the  present  national  union  was  organized,  and  as  a 
result  home  work  was  prevalent  in  those  cities.  It  was  not,  how- 
ever, confined  to  the  contract  system,  but  was  frequently  em- 
ployed by  establishments  which  gave  out  their  work  directly  to 
the  journeymen. 

Although,  for  the  reasons  suggested,  many  journeymen  be- 
lieved it  to  be  to  their  interest  to  work  at  home,  the  practice  of 
home  work  was  early  recognized  as  contrary  to  union  ideals,  and 
for  twenty  years  following  the  foundation  of  the  Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union  of  America,  the  question  of  abolishing  this  prac- 
tice, and  of  obliging  the  employers  to  furnish  free  shops  to  the 
tailors,  was  regarded  by  the  union  officers  as  the  foremost  ques- 
tion confronting  the  trade.62  It  was  hoped  by  this  reform  to 

so  The  tailors  did  not  cease  to  travel,  but  sought  work  from  established 
shops  rather  than  from  customers  in  their  homes.  Cf.  article  on  "Shop- 
board  Traditions,"  The  Tailor,  June,  1892,  p.  2. 

«i ' '  There  has  been  a  large  portion  of  the  trade,  for  various  reasons, 
under  different  circumstances,  compelled  to  work  at  their  homes,  if  so  they 
may  be  called  -  etc. ' '  From  The  Pioneer,  May  10,  1834.  Eeprinted  in 
Galton,  The  Tailoring  Tradel  p.  192;  also  in  The  Tailor,  February,  1904, 
p.  6. 

62  It  is  not  possible  with  data  now  at  hand  to  trace  the  beginning  of 
this  reform  in  the  custom  tailoring  trade  in  America.  The  writer  is  in- 


40  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [468 

reduce  hours,  to  regulate  the  distribution  of  work  and  to  stan- 
dardize the  general  conditions  of  employment,  in  a  much  more 
effective  way  than  could  be  done  while  the  system  of  working  at 
home  prevailed.  The  arguments  against  home  work63  and  in 
favor  of  free  shops  were  as  follows : 

(1)  Making  clothing  at  home,  particularly  in  the  tenements, 
is  dangerous  to  the  public  health,  on  account  of  the  possibility 
of  disease  and  infection. 

(2)  The  tailors  should  not  be  subjected  to  the  inconvenience, 
discomfort  and  expense  of  turning  their  homes  into  workshops, 
when  other  trades  have  shops  furnished  by  the  employers. 

(3)  Working  at  home  makes  it  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to 
regulate  hours  of  labor  or  the  distribution  of  work,  and  puts 
men  into  competition  to  get  the  work  away  from  one  another. 
Men  will  work  all  night  if  necessary  to  finish  a  rush  job  or  to 
get  more  than  their  share  of  the  work.     "This  just  cause  of 
complaint  would  be  remedied  by  the  adoption  of  the  back-shop 
system,  for  the  cutters  would  not  give  one  man  all  the  work  when 
the  men  were  all  together,  nor  would  the  tailors  in  the  face  of 
their  fellows  take  it."6* 

formed  by  former  Secretary  Lennon  that  in  1883,  when  the  present  union 
was  organized,  free  shops  were  already  the  rule  in  small  cities,  but  there  is 
no  complete  information  to  indicate  whether  the  free  shop  system  had 
existed  since  pioneer  days,  or  whether  it  had  been  won  by  the  activity  of 
tailors'  unions.  The  proceedings  and  constitutions  of  national  tailors' 
unions  between  1865  and  1875,  in  so  far  as  these  documents  have  come  into 
the  writer's  hands  (Cf.  Bibliography)  contain  only  a  few  references  to  the 
shop  question,  but  these  tend  to  indicate  that  the  shop  system  was  well 
established  in  small  cities,  and  that  the  activities  of  the  unions  were  directed 
toward  preventing  members  from  working  outside  the  shops,  and  employers 
from  abolishing  them.  Cf.  reports  of  Springfield,  111.,  and  Bloomington, 
111.,  unions,  Proceedings  of  ihe  Journeymen  Tailors'  National  Trade's 
Union,  1874,  pp.  11,  15. 

63  The  system  of  private  or  rented  shops,  while  in  a  sense  a  hybrid  sys- 
tem, is  not,  economically  speaking,  different  from  the  system  of  home  work, 
but  results  from  the  same  causes,  namely,  the  desire  of  the  journeymen  to 
work  with  helpers,  and  to  secure  work  from  more  than  one  store.  In  the 
report  of  the  general  secretary  to  the  1897  committee  on  laws  and  audit, 
the  "private  workshop"  is  included  with  the  home  shop  and  the  sweatshop 
as  one  of  the  institutions  to  be  abolished. 

e*  John  B.  Lennon,  article  on  ' '  Back  Shops, ' '  The  Tailor,  October,  1888, 
p.  5.  It  is  usual  in  free  shops  to  enforce  a  "turn-list,"  and  the  model 


469]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  41 

(4)  A  higher  quality  of  work  and  a  greater  degree  of  con- 
venience can  be  had  in  the  free  shops  than  elsewhere:     (a)  facil- 
ities are  better  than  the  tailors  can  provide  for  themselves ;  (b) 
tailors  learn  by  working  with  their  fellow-craftsmen;   (c)   the 
cutter  always  knows  just  what  condition  his  work  is  in,  and 
knows  who  can  lay  aside  work  in  hand  and  take  a  "rush  job;" 
(d)  no  time  is  lost  on  account  of  the  journeyman  being  obliged 
to  bring  the  garments  back  to  the  store  to  be  tried  on,  and  to 
wait  for  the  cutter  for  new  work. 

(5)  Home  work  prevents  a  proper  acquaintance  between  the 
merchant  tailor  and  the  journeyman,  and  prevents  the  inter- 
change of  information  among  the  journeymen  themselves. 

(6)  Home  work  causes  the  employment  of  more  tailors  than 
are  needed  by  each  firm,  creating  a  competition  that  is  injurious 
to  the  workers. 

(7)  Home  work  is   demoralizing  to  the   tailors'   children; 
they  are  kept  from  school  to  help  "push  through"  the  work; 
they  become  accustomed  to  seeing  the  father  at  his  work  indulge 
in  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks,  and  learn  the  habit. 

(8)  Home  work  prevents  effective  union  organization,  partly 
by  isolating  the  workmen,   and  partly  by  creating  jealousies 
among  them,  as  indicated  under  other  heads.85 

The  above  arguments  indicate  a  strong  case  for  the  free  shops, 
but  arguments  on  the  other  side  were  not  lacking.  Some  of  the 
employers  naturally  objected  to  the  additional  expense  of  fur- 
nishing shops,  and  obtained  a  measure  of  justification  for  this 

agreement  of  the  Tailors'  Union  provides  that  during  the  dull  season  every 
employee  shall  have  his  share  of  work. 

65  For  arguments  in  detail  against  home  work  and  in  favor  of  free  shops, 
see  articles  by  John  B.  Lennon,  in  The  Tailor,  October,  1888,  p.  5,  and 
October,  1889,  p.  3;  reports  of  same  writer  as  general  secretary,  1889,  1891, 
1893,  1897,  1899,  1901 ;  series  of  articles  by  Joseph  B.  Buchanan,  on  ' '  Free 
Shops  for  Free  Men,"  The  Tailor,  April,  May,  June,  July,  August,  and 
September,  1902. 

The  American  Tailor  and  Cutter,  a  fashion  magazine,  supported  the 
journeymen  tailors'  side  of  the  free  shop  question.  The  Tailor,  October, 
1888,  p.  5,  cols.  1  and  2.  The  tailors'  campaign  was  also  supported  by  the 
Illinois  branch  of  the  Consumers'  League  and  by  the  Chicago  "Record,.  Cf. 
The  Tailor,  July,  1900,  p.  10,  article  on  "It  ia  Time  for  the  Eevolution," 
reprinted  from  Chicago  Record,  March  16,  1900;  also  The  Tailor,  April, 
1900,  p.  2,  circular  of  Consumers'  League. 


42  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [470 

stand -from  the  fact  that  the  journeymen  themselves  were  not 
united  upon  the  question.  Further  attention  will  be  given  to  this 
phase  of  the  matter  in  the  course  of  our  account  of  the  efforts 
of  the  union  to  obtain  the  free  shops. 

Considerations  of  the  character  noted  above  led  the  Journey- 
men Tailors'  Union  of  America  as  early  as  1884  to  adopt  reso- 
lutions condemning  the  system  of  home  work,66  and  in  1887  a 
resolution  was  added  against  the  ' '  sweating  system. ' ' 6T  The 
1893  convention  directed  the  officers  to  see  that  existing  factory 
laws  against  sweating  be  enforced,  and  called  upon  the  legis- 
lative bodies  of  all  states,  territories  and  provinces  to  pass  fur- 
ther legislation  looking  toward  the  abolition  of  the  sweating 
evil.  On  the  subject  of  workshops  this  convention  recommended 
that  the  custom  be  discouraged  of  the  tailors'  bringing  intoxi- 
cants into  the  shops,  as  many  employers  were  refusing  to  grant 
free  workshops  on  this  account.68  In  addition,  it  proposed  an 
amendment,  for  consideration  by  the  members,  as  follows  :69 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general  officers  of  the  J.  T.  IT.  of  A.  to  foster 
the  movement  for  free  workshops;  it  shall  also  be  the  duty  of  each  L.  U. 
to  endeavor  to  secure  the  same  as  soon  as  practicable.  And  when  an 
opportunity  presents  itself  to  obtain  free  workshops  they  shall  make  every 
effort  in  their  power  to  secure  the  same. 

This  amendment  was  carried. 

Prior  to  1897  no  action  was  taken  to  make  the  movement  for 
free  shops  compulsory,70  but  in  that  year  an  amendment  of  a 
more  drastic  character  was  proposed  by  the  committee  on  laws 
and  audit,  providing  that  on  and  after  October  1,  1898,  no  mem- 
ber of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  should  be  permitted  to  work  at  home 
or  in  private  shops,  but  that  every  member  should  work  in  free 
shops  furnished  by  the  employers,  on  pain  of  a  fine  of  one  dollar 
for  each  day's  violation.71  Commenting  upon  this  amendment, 
before  the  vote  was  taken,  the  secretary  said:72 

6»  Proceedings,  1884,  p.  13,  Eesolution  No.  6. 

67  Constitution,  1887,  p.  21,  Eesolution  No.  12. 

es  Proceedings,  1893,  The  Tailor,  August,  1893,  p.  11. 

69  The  Tailor,  August,  1893,  p.  13,  Proposition  No.  24,  Sec.  144,  Cf.  also 
Constitution,  1894,  See.  132;  1895,  Sec.  131. 

TO  The  general  secretary  had  recommended  in  1893  that  working  in  free 
shops  be  made  compulsory  on  May  1,  1895,  but  the  convention  did  not  see 
fit  to  go  further  than  the  amendment  already  noted. 

71  The  Tailor,  August,  1897,  p.  16,  Proposition  No.  4. 

72  The  Tailor,  September,  1897,  p.  5. 


471]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  43 

In  its  probable  effect  upon  our  unions  and  upon  the  welfare  of  our  craft, 
No.  4  is,  no  doubt,  the  most  important  amendment  approved  by  the  Com- 
mittee. Upon  the  securing  of  free  work  shops  depends  the  securing  of 
every  reform  advocated  by  members  of  our  craft. 

The  amendment  was  carried  by  a  vote  of  1,776  to  597.73 

As  a  preliminary  to  the  enforcement  of  the  amendment  on 
the  subject  of  free  shops,  Secretary  Lennon  sent  out  a  circular 
to  all  unions,  in  which  each  was  requested  to  answer  the  follow- 
ing questions: 

1.  Total  number  of  members  in  local  union ; 

2.  Number  of  members  working  in  employers'  back-shops; 

3.  Number  of  members  working  outside; 

4.  "Will  your  local  union  be  prepared  to  demand  free  back-shops  October 
1,  1898? 

5.  Will  a  strike  probably  be  necessary  to  enforce  free  back-shops? 

6.  Amount  of  funds  in  local  treasury. 

Returns  were  due  April  1,  1898.  Returns  from  a  number  of 
cities  were  late,  but  by  September,  1898,  it  was  possible  to  pub- 
lish returns  from  all  but  nine  local  unions;  i.  e.,  from  202  out 
of  211  locals.7*  For  the  202  locals  reporting  the  returns  were 
as  follows : 

Total  number  of  members 5,061 

Number  of  members  working  in  employers'  back-shops 1,991 

Number  of  members  working  outside 3,070 

On  the  fourth  and  fifth  questions  the  returns  were  characterized 
by  the  secretary  as  ' '  indefinite. ' '  A  few  locals  failed  to  answer 
the  sixth  question,  but  as  many  as  answered  reported  a  total  of 
$4,003  in  local  union  treasuries.  Concluding  his  comment  upon 
the  returns,  the  secretary  said: 

The  question  of  securing  free  back-shops  is  now  in  the  hands  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  The  general  officers  cannot  enforce  this  law, 
and  will  not  be  responsible  if  it  is  not  enforced,  as  this  is  something  over 
which  they  have  absolutely  no  control.  The  local  unions,  if  they  will  act 
with  discretion  .  .  .  and  by  committees  consult  and  confer  with  the 
employers  of  their  respective  cities,  can  obtain  the  free  back-shops,  in  the 
most  cases  within  a  short  period  of  time,  without  any  strikes. 

The  subsequent  history  of  the  movement  for  free  shops  is  one 
of  partial  failure  and  partial  success.  It  was  found  impossible 
to  enforce  strictly  the  mandatory  provisions,  and  these  provi- 
sions were  accordingly  modified.  The  section  placing  a  fine  on 

TS  TT\e  Tailor,  November,  1897,  p.  8. 
•!*The  Tailor,  September,  1898,  pp.  8-9. 


44  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [472 

members  for  working  outside  of  the  free  shops  lasted  only  two 
years,  being  replaced  in  1899  by  the  following  amendment  :75 

On  February  1  and  July  1  of  each  year  the  G.  E.  B.  shall  designate  one 
or  more  local  unions  to  demand  from  their  employers  free  back  shops.  No 
L.  U.  shall  be  selected  until  by  a  majority  vote  the  L.  U.  have  shown  that 
they  are  prepared  and  favor  free  back  shops.  Locals  so  designated  shall  be 
sustained  by  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  if  a  strike  becomes  necessary  to  enforce 
the  demand.  Unions  so  selected  by  the  G.  E.  B.  shall  enforce  the  demand 
within  60  days  from  February  1  or  July  1.  The  usual  two-thirds  majority 
shall  be  required  to  call  the  members  out. 

Some  progress  was  made  under  the  amendment  of  1899.  In 
1901  a  more  elaborate  plan  was  adopted  than  any  hitherto  pro- 
posed. The  country  was  divided  into  five  districts,  numbered  in 
the  order  of  the  difficulty  which  was  anticipated  in  enforcing  the 
free  shops.78  Local  unions  in  the  first  district,  in  which  condi- 
tions were  regarded  as  the  most  favorable,  were  to  enforce  free 
shops  April  1,  1902 ;  in  the  second  district,  September  1,  1902 ; 
in  the  third  district,  April  1,  1903 ;  in  the  fourth  district,  Sep- 
tember 1,  1903;  and  in  the  fifth  district,  April  1,  1904.  The 
following  provision  was  added: 

Nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  any  local  union 
from  enforcing  free  shops  at  any  time  they  are  prepared.  The  G.  E.  B. 
shall  have  power  under  this  section  to  exempt  any  local  union  temporarily 
from  the  requirements  of  this  section  when  found  necessary. 

This  general  plan  remained  in  force  until  1905.  In  1903  the 
following  modifying  provisions  were  added : " 

75  The  Tailor,  August,  1899,  p.  16,  Proposition  No.  2,  Constitution,  1900, 
Sec.  20. 

76  The   Tailor,  August,   1901,   p.   19,   Proposition  No.  3.     The  districts 
were  as  follows: 

First  district:  Minnesota,  Iowa,  Missouri,  Arkansas,  Louisiana,  Texas, 
Indian  Territory,  Oklahoma  Territory,  Kansas,  Nebraska,  South  Dakota, 
North  Dakota,  Montana,  Wyoming,  Colorado,  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  Utah, 
Idaho,  Washington,  Oregon,  California  and  Nevada. 

Second  district:     All  of  Canada. 

Third  district:  Wisconsin,  Michigan,  Illinois,  Indiana,  Ohio,  Kentucky, 
Mississippi,  Alabama  and  Tennessee. 

Fourth  district:  Pennsylvania,  West  Virginia,  Maryland,  Delaware, 
Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Georgia  and  Florida. 

Fifth  district:  New  Jersey,  New  York,  Connecticut,  Ehode  Island,  Mas- 
sachusetts, Vermont,  New  Hampshire  and  Maine. 

77  The   Tailor,   September,   1903,  p.  1,   Proposition  No.  3;    Constitution, 
1904,  Sec.  21. 


473]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  45 

Each  local  union  after  investigation  by  a  committee,  when  the  evidence 
warrants,  shall  have  the  power  to  excuse  any  member  from  working  in  the 
free  shops.  A  two-thirds  majority  shall  be  required  in  each  case. 

The  use  of  the  label  shall  not  be  permitted  on  the  work  of  any  firm 
after  January  1,  1906,  that  does  not  furnish  a  free  shop. 

In  1905,  the  following  sections  were  substituted  for  the 
whole  :78 

All  local  unions  that  have  not  secured  free  back-shops  shall  do  so  as 
speedily  as  possible,  but  each  local  union  shall  be  the  sole  judge  of  when  it 
is  safe  and  expedient  to  resort  to  extreme  action  to  secure  them.  If  any 
local  union  desires  to  strike  for  free  back-shops,  a  two-thirds  majority  shall 
be  required.  Said  action  must  be  in  accordance  with  sections  75  and  76 
governing  strikes  and  lockouts. 

Resolved:  That  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  in  conjunction  with  A.  F.  of  L.  do 
all  in  their  power  to  abolish  home  work  through  legislation. 

It  will  be  observed  from  the  amendments  noted  above  that  the 
original  mandatory  rules  on  the  subject  of  the  enforcement  of 
free  shops  were  materially  relaxed.  The  reasons  for  this  seem 
to  have  been  twofold:  (1)  the  fact  that  the  members  were  not, 
united  in  demanding  the  free  shops,  a  considerable  number  re- 
fusing to  work  in  them;  (2)  the  growing  conviction  on  the  part 
of  the  officers  that  home  work  was  an  inevitable  consequence  of 
the  piece  system,  and  that  the  attention  of  the  union  should  be 
turned  to  the  abolition  of  the  latter  system.  In  his  1901  report 79 
Secretary  Lennon  said : 

I  regret  to  say  that  we  still  have  quite  a  considerable  minority  of  our 
members  who  are  opposed  to  having  free  shops  furnished  by  the  employers. 

And  in  his  1905  report  :80 

While  the  piece  system  of  work  so  largely  prevails  in  our  trade,  it  ap- 
pears as  though  it  will  be  almost  impossible  to  completely  enforce  the  free 
shop  system,  and  this  more  because  of  the  opposition  of  the  journeymen 
tailors,  than  from  the  opposition  of  the  employers.  To  work  at  home  gives 
the  journeyman  tailor  an  opportunity  to  work  for  several  different  estab- 
lishments, and  they  believe  as  a  rule  that  this  is  an  advantage  to  them,  and 
believing  that,  it  is  almost  an  impossibility  to  persuade  or  force  every  one 
into  the  free  shops.  I  believe,  however,  that  it  is  absolutely  essential  for 
the  progress  of  our  craftsmen  that  we  continue  to  stand  for  the  enforcement 
of  the  free  shop,  and  that  wherever  it  be  possible  our  unions  establish  this 
system  in  their  respective  communities.  When  the  time  comes  that  the  piece 

"8  The  Tailor,  March,  1905,  pp.  2,  5,  Propositions  2,  41;  vote,  May,  1905, 
supplement;  Constitution,  1905,  Sec.  21. 
"9  The  Tailor,  August,  1901,  p.  5. 
so  The  Tailor,  February,  1905,  p.  7. 


46  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [474 

work  system  is  supplanted  by  daily  or  weekly  wage  rates,  then  the  free 
shops  will  become  universal  at  once,  and  so  anxious  was  I  for  the  application 
of  the  free  shops  that  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  I  believe  beyond 
the  shadow  of  a  doubt  that  working  by  the  piece  is  perhaps  the  greatest 
possible  injury  that  could  be  perpetrated  upon  our  craftsmen  throughout 
the  length  and  breadth  of  the  world.  It  is  unfortunate  that  we  have  per- 
mitted it  to  become  so  prevalent,  and  it  is  more  unfortunate  that  a  great 
majority  of  our  members  are  favorable  to  piece  work.  The  history  of  the 
labor  movement  and  of  the  industrial  world  has  demonstrated  clearly  that 
long  hours  are  almost  the  universal  concomitant  of  piece  work,  and  it 
equally  shows  that  long  hours  are  accompanied  by  low  wages.  We  want 
the  free  shops  because  the  tailors  need  better  wages.  Better  wages  in  the 
main  cannot  be  had  without  a  reduction  of  the  hours  of  labor,  and  the  re- 
duction of  the  hours  of  labor  cannot  be  expected  to  any  very  great  extent 
while  the  piece  work  system  prevails  in  the  tailoring  industry,  and  it  seems 
to  me,  therefore,  that  we  should  turn  our  attention  with  all  the  vigor  possi- 
ble to  creating  among  our  members  a  sentiment  favorable  to  working  by  the 
week. 

The  official  reports  of  Secretary  Lennon  in  1907  and  1909, 
,and  of  Secretary  Brais  in  1913,81  indicated  little  change  in  the 
situation  since  1905.  In  each  of  these  reports  the  fact  was  em- 
phasized that  many  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors  themselves  were 
not  favorable  to  the  free  shops.  In  the  1907  report  it  was  stated 
that  even  in  some  cities  where  the  free  shops  had  been  secured, 
they  were  lost  again  on  account  of  the  opposition  of  the  Tailors. 
In  the  1909  report  the  opinion  was  expressed  that  the  new  sys- 
tem of  making  custom  clothing  in  factories  would  mean  free 
shops  and  the  limitation  of  hours,  and  that  thus  far  the  new  sys- 
tem was  to  be  commended.  The  1913  report  is  quoted,  as  the 
latest  official  statement  on  this  subject: 

It  is  true  that  a  great  many  of  our  members  enjoy  free  back  shops,  but 
the  home  work  system  is  still  an  established  custom  and  many  members  of 
the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  do  not  want  to  change  it.  They  are  satisfied  and  will  not 
do  anything  to  change  it.  They  favor  the  free  back  shop  as  a  principle 
adopted  in  their  constitution,  but  when  it  comes  to  enforcing  it,  it  is  a  joke. 

The  piece  work  system  must  go  before  any  real  progress  can  be  made  in 
our  trade.  Both  the  home  work  and  the  piece  work  systems  are  conducive 
to  long  hours  of  labor;  child  labor;  sweat  shops;  contract  systems;  cheap 
labor;  low  wages  and  a  general  deterioration  of  the  health  of  the  workers. 

The  net  results  of  the  campaign  for  free  shops  between  1898 
and  1905  may  best  be  indicated  in  tabular  form,  as  follows : 

^  The  Tailor,  August,  1907,  p.  4;  August,  1909,  p.  10;  August,  1913, 
p.  12. 


Total  mem- 

In free 

Per  cent 

bership  (est.) 

shops  82 

Outside 

in  free  shops 

5061 

1991 

3070 

39 

6217 

2627 

3590 

42 

9727 

4200 

5527 

43 

14496 

8367 

6129 

58 

14100 

8000 

6000 

57 

475]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  47 


September,  1898 
July,  1899 
July,  1901 
July,  1903 
January,  1905 

Eeturns  from  a  limited  portion  of  the  membership  were  also 
received  in  1912,  indicating  conditions  on  January  1  of  that 
year.  In  71  cities  reporting,  there  were  5,366  union  members, 
and  of  these  2,308,  or  43  per  cent,  were  working  in  free  shops. 
The  returns  represented  only  23  per  cent  of  the  local  unions 
and  39  per  cent  of  the  membership,  and  since,  of  the  5,366  mem- 
bers reporting,  4,047  were  in  large  cities  (over  100,000),  the 
returns  probably  are  not  representative  of  the  situation  through- 
out the  whole  country.  Of  the  4,047  members  in  large  cities, 
1,253  were  in  the  free  shops,  or  31  per  cent ;  while  of  1,319  mem- 
bers in  cities  of  less  than  100,000  population,  1,055  were  in  the 
free  shops,  or  80  per  cent.  It  should  not  be  concluded  from  this, 
that  the  percentage  of  members  in  free  shops  is  low  in  all  large 
cities.  There  are  some  notable  exceptions;  for  example:  St. 
Paul,  Winnipeg,  Portland  (Ore.),  Seattle,  Milwaukee,  Atlanta, 
and  San  Francisco.83 

Referring  to  conditions  at  the  present  time  (1917),  the  writer 
is  informed  that  little  effort  is  being  made  to  force  members  by 
means  of  fines  to  work  in  the  free  shops.84  The  model  form  of 
agreement  between  local  unions  and  employers85  provides  that 
where  free  shops  exist,  all  work  shall  be  done  on  the  employer's 
premises,  and  where  the  local  unions  have  this  form  of  agree- 
ment with  employers  furnishing  shops,  home  work  is  automati- 
cally prevented.  The  most  important  movement  against  home 
work  recently  made  was  the  attempt  of  the  New  York  union  in 
1916  to  secure  free  shops,  increased  wages  and  the  employment 
of  union  men  only.  This  strike  was  lost  by  the  union,  and  led  to 
a  considerable  loss  of  membership  in  New  York  City. 

82  Estimated  by  Secretary  Lennon  from  incomplete  returns  from  local 
unions.  Cf.  The  Tailor,  September,  1898,  pp.  8-9;  August,  1899,  p.  7; 
August,  1901,  p.  5;  August,  1903,  p.  4;  February,  1905,  p.  7. 

ss  Cf.  Stowell,  op.  tit.,  p.  157,  and  table,  pp.  151-155. 

s*  Secretary  Thomas  Sweeney,  correspondence,  January  24,   1917. 

85  Cf.  supra,  note  22. 


48  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [476 

The  attitude  hostile  to  the  piece  system  indicated  by  Secretary 
Lennon  in  1905  was  endorsed  by  the  union  in  1909,  and  again  in 
1913.86  Nevertheless  the  substitution  of  the  weekly  system  for 
the  piece  system  is  proceeding  but  slowly.  As  in  the  case  of  the 
free  shops,  the  movement  is  retarded  by  individual  journeymen 
and  employers  who  prefer  the  old  system.  The  piece  system 
appeals  to  employers  because  it  is  easy  to  adjust  to  seasonal 
irregularities,  and  because  it  facilitates  the  calculation  of  costs. 
It  is  also  favored  by  many  of  the  journeymen,  because  they 
think  they  can  make  more  money  under  this  system,  and  be- 
cause they  do  not  like  the  confinement  of  a  shop  and  fixed  hours. 
The  movement  for  the  abolition  of  the  piece  system  is  likely  to 

ss  The  following  resolution  was  submitted  by  the  1909  convention  and 
approved  by  referendum  vote: 

"Resolved:  That  we  recommend  to  all  our  members  the  substitution  of 
the  weekly  system  of  work  instead  of  the  piece  system." 

In  1913  a  declaration  in  favor  of  eliminating  the  piece  work  system  was 
added  to  the  preamble  of  the  constitution.  Cf.  Tlie  Tailor,  August,  1909,  p. 
44,  Proposition  No.  40,  Sec.  5;  vote:  November,  1909,  supplement;  Consti- 
tution, 1914,  Preamble. 

The  movement  against  the  piece  system  was  not  new  at  these  dates,  but 
beginning  in  1905  appears  to  have  been  given  greater  prominence  as  a  re- 
form necessary  before  other  reforms  could  be  carried  out.  As  early  as 
May,  1886,  the  American  Tailor  and  Cutter  expressed  the  opinion  that  the 
piece  work  system  was  mainly  responsible  for  existing  troubles  in  the  tailor- 
ing trade,  and  in  1889  Secretary  Lennon  declared  that  the  piece  system 
was  the  greatest  evil  in  the  trade  except  the  lack  of  free  shops.  The  Tailor, 
October,  1888,  p.  5,  col.  2 ;  December,  1889,  p.  4,  col.  2. 

The  characteristic  trade  union  argument  against  the  piece  system  appears 
very  clearly  in  the  following  extract  from  an  article  by  P.  Ewald  Jensen,  a 
tailor  of  Chicago,  in  The  Tailor,  May,  1892,  p.  5: 

"Piece  work,  as  a  system  to  work  by,  has  in  the  past  history  of  labor 
proven  itself  to  be  detrimental  to  the  best  interest  of  the  wage  earners,  be- 
cause its  natural  tendency  is  to  lower  wages.  This  is  brought  about  for  the 
simple  reason  that  piece  work  wages  as  a  rule  are  guaged  by  the  producing 
power  of  the  ablest,  the  superior  mechanic,  consequently  the  slow  or  inferior 
mechanic  or  laborer  is  thereby  degraded  into  starvation  wages.  Whenever 
a  reduction  in  prices  takes  place,  we  find  the  superior  workman  who  is 
capable  of  exerting  himself  even  more  so  prompted  by  said  reduction,  doing 
all  in  his  power  to  maintain  his  former  wages  by  tasking  his  system  to  its 
utmost  capacity.  The  employer,  seeing  this,  will,  as  the  case  is,  further 
reduce  the  price  on  the  piece  work,  and  wages  thereby  are  lowered  to  its 
death  line.  The  inferior  workman  is  thereby  put  to  a  level  with  the  beggar, 
he  having  no  choice  in  the  matter,  simply  to  submit." 


477]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  49 

make  the  most  headway  where  team  systems  and  sectional  sys- 
tems of  production,87  which  nearly  always  involve  payment  by 
the  week,  are  being  installed  upon  the  initiative  of  the  employers. 
The  situation  at  present  may  be  illustrated  by  the  following  re- 
port from  Denver,  Colorado:88 

The  union  has  succeeded  in  introducing  in  some  shops  the  weekly  pay- 
scale,  where  the  tailors  enjoy  a  nine  hours'  work  day,  double  pay  for  holi- 
days, and  time-and-a-half  for  overtime.  This  alone  gives  good  hopes  that 
the  rest  of  the  shops  will  soon  fall  in  line. 

Since  the  weekly  pay  system  is  not  introduced  in  all  the  shops,  a  friction 
exists  between  some  of  our  brothers.  Some  piece  workers  do  not  quite 
understand  the  benefits  which  week  workers  derive  under  their  system.  They 
think  they  are  a  kind  of  obstruction  to  their  own  progress,  and  therefore 
try  to  blockade  by  denouncing  the  week  workers.  On  the  other  end,  the 
week  workers  who  are  satisfied  with  their  present  conditions  want  the  piece 
workers  to  join  them,  and  thereby  better  their  conditions. 

The  Denver  correspondent  indicates  further  that  another 
cause  of  friction  is  the  effort  to  adjust  the  wages  of  helpers  of 
ments  of  this  character  will  probably  be  difficult  until  the  weekly 
workers,  whose  helpers  are  paid  by  the  employers,  so  that  neither 
class  of  workers  will  have  the  advantage  of  the  other.  Adjust- 
ments of  this  character  will  probably  be  difficult  until  the  weekly 
system  is  completely  established,  and  this,  in  the  writer's  opin- 
ion, will  not  take  place  for  a  number  of  years  to  come. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  the  curious  evolution  of  opinion  which 
has  taken  place  with  reference  to  the  system  of  payment.  Time 
payment  was  the  rule  in  England  during  the  period  of  parlia- 
mentary regulation,  and  the  English  tailors  struck  against  piece 
work  when  it  was  first  introduced.89  But  piece  work  seems  to 
have  been  the  rule  in  America  since  an  early  date,90  and  it  is 
only  recently  that  the  American  tailors  are  getting  back  to  the 
old  idea  of  time  payment. 

The  campaign  of  the  Tailors'  Union  for  free  shops  and  the 
abolition  of  the  piece  system,  cannot,  in  view  of  the  results,  be 
regarded  as  a  complete  failure.  Nevertheless,  it  is  a  good  illus- 
tration of  the  difficulty  which  is  encountered,  both  in  civic  com- 
munities and  in  labor  organizations,  of  enforcing  by  means  of 

87  Cf.  Stowell,  op.  tit.,  29-32 ;  also  infra,  pp.  51-52. 

ss  The  Tailor,  March  13,  1917,  p.  3,  col.  2,  letter  from  Goodman  Levin. 

89  Cf.  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  pp.  14-16. 

o°Ibid.,  pp.  17-18. 


50  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [478 

laws  and  rules  reforms  to  which  a  considerable  minority  are 
opposed. 

(/)    The  "Efficiency"  Movement 

The  modern  movement  for  "efficiency"  or  "scientific  man- 
agement," in  so  far  as  it  concerns  the  workers  in  the  tailoring  in- 
dustry, has  taken  two  principal  forms:  (1)  improved  methods 
of  cost  accounting,  particularly  with  reference  to  labor  costs; 
(2)  changes  in  the  system  of  production. 

(1)  Improved  methods  of  labor  cost  accounting.  Only  a 
limited  number  of  cost  schedules  used  in,  or  suggested  for,  the 
merchant  tailoring  business  have  come  to  the  writer's  attention, 
and  it  is  difficult  to  perceive  in  these  any  general  principle  for 
the  calculation  of  labor  costs.  As  a  rule  the  labor  cost  rises 
with  the  selling  price  of  the  suit,  but  not  in  a  fixed  proportion, 
the  percentage  of  labor  cost  to  selling  price  varying  considerably 
in  the  schedules  the  writer  has  seen.  In  some  of  these  schedules 
apparently  the  selling  price  is  determined  first,  and  the  "over- 
head" being  regarded  as  constant  (about  25  per  cent),  the  ac- 
countant proceeds  to  figure  what  costs  for  material  and  journey- 
men tailors'  labor  he  can  afford  for  a  suit  of  the  given  price,  if  a 
given  percentage  of  profit  is  to  be  realized.  In  other  schedules 
all  costs  are  determined  first,  and  the  selling  price  is  adjusted  to 
yield  the  desired  percentage  of  profit. 

It  will  be  recalled  that  the  official  bill  of  prices  of  the  Tailors' 
Union  recognizes  only  two  classes  of  piece  rates  for  the  same 
kind  of  garment.  For  example,  in  the  bill  of  prices  of  the  Bur- 
lington, Iowa,  local  union,  dated  1906,  which  follows  closely  the 
form  of  the  official  bill,  the  scale  for  sack  coats  is  as  follows: 

1st  class  2nd  class 

Double-breasted  sack  coat $8.00  $7.50 

Single-breasted  sack  coat 7.50  7.00 

This  scale  gives  the  price  for  "start"  of  the  coat.  There  is  in 
the  Burlington  bill  a  charge  of  50  cents  extra  for  trying  on  the 
coat,  and  if  there  are  any  "extras"  or  fancy  additions  to  the 
plain  pattern,  something  is  added  to  the  piece  price  on  account 
of  these  "extras."  The  basis  of  classification  as  between  "1st 
class"  and  "2nd  class"  is  the  kind  of  material  of  which  the 
garment  is  made.  This  is  a  different  kind  of  schedule  from  that 
usually  proposed  by  efficiency  experts,  which,  whatever  the  prin- 


479]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  51 

eiple  employed,  may  yield  as  many  as  seven  or  eight  classes  of 
labor  costs  for  a  range  of  selling  prices  of  suits,  say  from  $35  to 
$70.  Upon  the  general  idea  of  piece  rates  graduated  according 
to  selling  prices,  the  Tailors'  journal  has  the  following  to  say:91 
We  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of 
America  will  not  commit  itself  to  any  such  plan,  the  plan  being  wrong  in 
principle.  Wages  cannot  be  fixed  by  the  selling  price  of  suits.  If  that  was 
admitted  as  a  sound  rule,  it  would  also  be  sound  to  make  suits  for  nothing 
in  case  the  employers  saw  fit  to  give  suits  away  free  of  charge. 

(2)  Changes  in  the  system  of  production.  Under  what  is 
known  among  tailors  as  the  "old-line"  system,  each  garment  is 
made  by  a  specialist,  coatmaker,  vestmaker,  or  trousersmaker, 
who  has  served  an  apprenticeship  or  undergone  an  equivalent 
training  for  his  own  particular  branch  of  the  trade.  The  skilled 
journeyman  may  finish  the  entire  garment  himself,  or  he  may 
turn  over  a  portion  of  the  work,  requiring  less  skill,  to  his  help- 
er. There  are  variations  in  the  system  due  to  the  employment  of 
more  than  one  helper,  but  in  such  cases  the  tailor  and  his  several 
helpers  do  not  constitute  a  ' '  team, ' '  in  the  sense  that  a  different 
kind  of  work  is  assigned  to  each  helper,  unless  the  tailor  is  an 
unusually  capable  organizer  and  manager.  In  any  case,  the 
subdivision  of  work  is  under  the  control  of  the  journeyman,  and 
not  under  the  control  of  his  employer ;  and  it  frequently  happens 
that  the  journeyman  is  engaged  on  processes  which  could  be  car- 
ried on  by  workers  of  less  skill  and  of  a  shorter  period  of  train- 
ing. It  was  no  doubt  the  observation  of  this  fact  which  led  to 
the  devising  of  new  and  different  systems  of  production. 

Under  the  new  systems,  the  aim  is  to  employ  the  services  of  the 
highly  skilled  tailor  only  on  those  portions  of  the  work  where 
they  are  absolutely  needed,  the  balance  being  turned  over  to 
operatives,  each  of  whom  is  skilled  in  some  one  of  the  finishing 
processes.  In  the  most  highly  developed  form  of  this  system 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  "skilled  coatmaker,"  for  example. 
Each  employee  is  a  specialist  upon  some  section  of  the  coat.  All 
employees,  including  the  lowest  paid  helpers,  are  paid  by  the 
employer,  and  the  subdivision  of  labor  is  under  his  supervision, 
or  that  of  the  cutter  or  foreman  whom  he  hires.  The  establish- 
ment of  the  new  systems  involves  almost  invariably  the  establish- 

9i  T~he  Tailor,  April  3,  1917,  p.  3. 


52  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [480 

ment  of  a  workshop  by  the  employer  and  the  payment  of  all 
employees  by  the  week  instead  of  by  the  piece. 

It  is  obvious  that  unless  the  volume  of  custom  tailoring  to  be 
done  increases  on  account  of  improved  methods,  decreased  costs 
and  lowered  prices,  the  new  systems  require  the  services  of  fewer 
skilled  journeymen  than  before.  Like  the  workers  in  other  trades 
in  which  similar  changes  were  taking  place,  the  tailors  fixed 
their  attention  upon  the  immediate  consequences  rather  than 
upon  the  ultimate  consequences  of  the  change,  and  tried  to  op- 
pose it.92  However,  so  little  success  was  met  with  that  finally 
it  became  the  policy  of  the  national  union  not  to  support  strikes 
for  this  purpose,  as  long  as  there  was  any  possibility  of  securing 
an  agreement  between  the  employers  and  the  union  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  new  system  after  it  was  started.93  It  was  not  al- 
ways possible  to  re-employ  all  of  the  journeymen,  but  frequently 
some  of  them  could  be  re-employed,  and  this  was  considered 
better,  provided  union  conditions  could  be  had,  than  a  strike. 
It  has  already  been  noted  that  in  so  far  as  the  new  systems  tend 
to  accelerate  the  movement  toward  the  time  system  of  payment 
and  free  workshops,  they  are  not  regarded  as  a  disadvantage  by 
the  union  officials. 

»2  The  contest  with  the  firm  of  Gray  and  Graham,  Dallas,  Texas,  in  1903, 
is  a  good  example  of  a  contest  arising  out  of  the  change  of  system.  This 
firm  appears  to  have  dispensed  with  the  services  of  union  men  altogether, 
in  order  to  have  a  free  hand  for  the  introduction  of  the  team  system,  and 
for  this  reason  the  tailors  referred  to  the  contest  as  a  "lockout."  How- 
ever, the  contest  would  not  probably  have  arisen  if  the  union  had  not  been 
opposed  to  the  new  system.  The  firm  in  question  employed  before  the  lock- 
out about  forty  journeymen,  and  paid  a  good  piece-scale:  coats  $8.00  and 
upward,  pants  $2.75  and  upward,  vests  $2.50  and  upward.  After  introduc- 
ing the  new  system  they  employed  about  50  people  in  the  operating  depart- 
ment, only  about  four  of  whom  were  highly  skilled  workers,  the  balance 
being  operatives  who  had  learned  specialized  processes.  All  employees  were 
paid  on  a  time  basis.  The  wages  in  1911  ranged  from  $3.00  to  $15.00  per 
week.  (Correspondence  with  local  union,  1911.)  The  union  was  not  suc- 
cessful in  preventing  the  establishment  of  the  new  system,  which,  so  far  as 
the  writer  knows,  is  still  in  operation. 

»3  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  82 :  "  No  strike  shall  be  supported  where  the 
employer  desires  to  change  from  the  piece  system  to  the  weekly  system, 
where  conditions  are  satisfactory  to  the  employees. ' '  The  last  clause  is 
somewhat  ambiguous,  but  is  interpreted  by  the  writer  to  mean,  "where 
conditions  are  satisfactory  to  as  many  of  the  union  men  as  can  be  re- 
employed,  ' '  regardless  of  the  feelings  of  those  who  are  displaced. 


481]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  53 

(g)    Regulation  of  Helpers  and  Apprentices 

Since,  in  a  majority  of  cases,  the  tailor's  helper  or  apprentice 
is  employed  by  the  tailor  himself,  the  regulation  of  helpers  and 
apprentices  is  a  matter  almost  wholly  internal  to  the  union,  and 
not  subject  to  collective  bargaining  with  the  employers.  The 
only  exceptions  to  this  rule  occur  where  the  employer  takes  the 
initiative  in  trying  to  induce  journeymen  to  take  apprentices,  or 
where  a  weekly  system  has  been  established,  placing  helpers  and 
apprentices  under  the  employer's  control.  The  whole  subject  of 
the  regulation  of  helpers  and  apprentices  will  therefore  be  dis- 
cussed in  a  separate  chapter,  and  the  limited  connection  of  the 
subject  with  collective  bargaining  will  be  taken  up  in  that  chap- 
ter. 

4.      STRIKES  AND  LOCKOUTS 

(a)    Definitions 

Strikes.  The  term  "strike"  is  familiar,  and  scarcely  requires 
definition.  In  general  a  strike  implies  that  the  initiative  in  the 
dispute  leading  to  a  cessation  of  work  is  taken  by  the  workmen. 

Lockouts.  The  term  "lockout"  is  used  somewhat  indiscrimi- 
nately in  the  tailoring  trade,  to  indicate  any  of  the  following 
situations : 

(1)  All  union  members  discharged,  and  declaration  made  by 
employers  that  no  unionists  will  be  employed. 

(2)  One  or  more  unionists  discharged,  on  account  of  special 
activity  in  the  union. 

(3)  Unionists  permitted  to  remain  at  work,  provided  they 
will  bargain  as  individuals;  employers  refuse  to  sign  any  agree- 
ment with  union. 

The  question  as  to  whether  a  disturbance  is  a  strike  or  a  lock- 
out has  come  up  in  connection  with  the  applications  of  local 
unions  to  the  General  Executive  Board  for  support.  In  such 
cases  the  first  situation  named  has  always  been  recognized  as  a 
lockout.  The  second  case  might  be  regarded  as  a  partial  lockout, 
but  it  is  more  usual  to  refer  to  the  members  discharged  as  "vic- 
timized." While  recognizing  that  "victimized"  members  have 
a  grievance,  the  union  has  not  as  a  rule  demanded  their  rein- 
statement by  the  employer,  but  has  simply  aided  such  members 
from  the  strike  benefit  fund  until  they  could  get  work  elsewhere. 


54  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [482 

As  to  the  third  case,  it  may  be  regarded  as  nearly  equivalent  to 
the  first,  as  the  employers  know  that  as  a  rule  the  members  will 
not  work  under  these  conditions.  However,  technically  speak- 
ing, it  is  better  to  regard  a  disturbance  growing  out  of  this  case 
as  a  strike  for  enforcing  the  system  of  collective  bargaining, 
rather  than  as  a  lockout. 

Closely  connected  with  the  situations  named  above  are  those 
where  the  employers  refuse  to  employ  unionists  under  any  cir- 
cumstances, or  where  they  demand  an  agreement  from  prospec- 
tive employees  that  they  will  not  join  a  union.  These  are  to  be 
regarded  as  phases  of  the  "  blacklist." 

If  the  above  distinctions  are  followed,  the  greater  number  of 
the  important  controversies  that  have  taken  place  in  the  tailor- 
ing trade  can  be  brought  under  the  head  of  "strikes." 

(&)    General  Strike  Policy  of  the  Union 

From  the  very  beginning  it  has  been  the  policy  of  the  national 
union  to  maintain  centralized  control  of  strikes.  The  principal 
aid  to  maintaining  this  kind  of  control  is  the  fact  that  the  strike 
benefit  fund  is  governed  by  the  national  union.  Before  granting 
support  to  any  local  union  it  has  been  customary  to  make  the 
following  requirements : 

(1)  A  genuine  effort  must  be  made  by  the  local  union  to 
settle  the  controversy  by  negotiation  with  the  employers,  before 
calling  a  strike.    If  such  negotiation  fails,  a  secret  vote  of  the 
union  is  to  be  taken  as  to  whether  the  members  involved  shall 
be  calletl  out  and  supported,  a  two-thirds  vote  to  decide. 

(2)  Before  any  strike  is  actually  begun,  full  information 
must  be  sent  to  headquarters,  indicating  the  cause  of  difficulty ; 
the  number  of  members  likely  to  be  involved;  the  likelihood  of 
all  such  members  responding  to  a  strike  call,  if  it  is  ordered; 
the  condition  of  trade,  and  the  prospects  of  success.    No  mem- 
bers must  be  called  out  until  permission  has  been  received  from 
the  General  Executive  Board.    Failure  to  observe  this  provision 
debars  the  local  union  from  the  receipt  of  benefit,  and  any 
strike  undertaken  without  the  sanction  of  the  Executive  Board 
must  be  carried  on  at  the  risk  and  expense  of  the  local  union. 

(3)  As  a  rule  the  union  is  requested  to  delay  radical  action 
and  to  keep  the  members  at  work  until  a  representative  of  the 


483]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  55 

national  union  can  be  sent  to  the  city  to  endeavor  to  secure  a 
settlement.  Many  strikes  have  been  avoided  in  this  way,  the 
services  of  the  national  organizers  in  helping  to  settle  local  con- 
troversies being  fully  as  important  as  their  strictly  organizing 
duties. 

The  essentials  of  the  policy  outlined  above  may  be  found  in 
the  earliest  constitutions  of  the  national  union,94  and  with  some 
modifications  have  been  continued  to  the  present  date. 

(c)    Strike  Benefit 

Members  who  are  on  a  strike  which  is  legal  under  the  consti- 
tution and  approved  by  the  Executive  Board  receive  from  the  na- 
tional union  the  sum  of  five  dollars  per  week.  No  strike  benefit 
is  paid  for  the  first  week  of  any  strike,  nor  for  any  strike  involv- 
ing one-third  or  more  of  the  members  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.95 

The  expenditure  for  strike  benefit  since  the  union  was  founded 
has  been  larger  than  for  any  other  single  item.  In  the  period 
beginning  August  15,  1887,  and  ending  June  30,  1916,  the  total 
amount  expended  for  strike  benefit  was  $565,089.44. 

In  addition  to  the  national  strike  benefit,  there  are  three 
sources  of  income  upon  which  local  unions  involved  in  severely 
contested  strikes  have  relied  for  support:  (1)  local  strike  ben- 
efits; (2)  donations  from  other  local  unions  affiliated  with  the 
J.  T.  U.  of  A. ;  (3)  donations  from  unions  in  other  trades. 

(1)  Local  strike  benefits.  Local  strike  benefits  may  be  paid 
from  funds  accumulated  in  the  local  treasury,  or,  in  cases  where 
all  of  the  members  of  the  union  are  not  involved  in  the  strike, 
the  benefits  may  be  raised  by  assessment  upon  the  members  re- 
maining at  work.  The  general  officers  have  discouraged  unions 
from  attempting  to  pay  local  strike  benefits,  on  the  ground  that 
it  may  be  impossible  to  keep  up  the  payments  throughout  the 
strike,  or  to  make  them  in  every  strike,  and  in  such  a  case  mem- 
bers are  disappointed  and  have  an  excuse  for  deserting  the 
union.96 

a*  Cf.  By-lawa  of  1884,  Articles  12,  13. 

95  Constitution,  1914,  Sees.  83-84.     In  case  of  emergency,  due-bills  may 
be  issued  for  the  strike  benefit.     (Sec.  87.)     Other  sections  governing  the 
strike  benefit  are  Sees.  90,  91,  and  93. 

96  The  Tailor,  April,  1901,  p.  8,  third  editorial;   October,  1903,  p.  17, 
article  on  "Local  Strike  Benefits." 


56  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [484 

(2)  Donations  from  other  local  unions  affiliated  with  the 
J.  T.  U.  of  A.     In  the  case  of  severely  contested  strikes  involving 
enough  members  to  put  a  strain  upon  the  national  treasury,  ap- 
peals have  been  sent  out  to  the  local  unions  not  affected  by  the 
strike.     These  appeals  upon  the  whole  have  met  with  success, 
and  large  amounts  of  money  have  been  raised  in  this  way. 

(3)  Donations  from  unions  of  other  trades.     Appeals  for 
donations  from  other  trades  are  handled  through  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  and  must  be  endorsed  by  that  body.     It 
has  been  necessary  to  resort  to  this  method  of  raising  money  on 
only  a  few  occasions,  the  most  important  being  the  contests  be- 
tween the  Tailors'  Union  and  the  Merchant  Tailors'  Protective 
Association  in  1903  and  1904,  involving  the  locals  in  Denver, 
Kansas  City,  Cleveland,  and  some  other  cities.    In  the  course  of 
these  contests  the  sum  of  $5,524.32  was  raised  through  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor  for  the  assistance  of  the  tailors.97    The 
Federation  also  gave  assistance  to  the  tailors  and  certain  other 
trades  who  were  locked  out  in  Los  Angeles  in  1907.98 

(d)  Detailed  regulation  of  strikes 

The  full  text  of  the  regulations  on  the  subject  of  strikes  and 
strike  benefit  is  found  in  the  constitution,  1914,  Sections  79-95. 
In  addition  to  the  points  discussed  above,  the  most  important 
provisions  are  as  follows: 

(1)  After  a  union  has  complied  fully  with  the  constitution 
and  has  voted  to  strike,  the  General  Executive  Board  has  the 
power  either  to  sustain  the  local  union  or  to  refuse  to  sustain 
it.     If  the  Executive  Board  refuses  to  sustain  the  local  union,  an 
appeal  may  be  taken  to  the  general  membership,  and  if  the  ap- 
peal is  sustained  by  a  majority  of  the  members  voting,  the  local 
union  shall  be  sustained  by  the  Executive  Board.99 

(2)  No  local  union  can  receive  strike  benefit  where  it  has 

broken  an  existing  agreement  with  employers.100 
» 

vi  Cf.  copy  of  A.  F.  of  L.  resolutions  endorsing  Tailors'  appeal,  The  Tai- 
lor, December,  1903,  p.  21;  also  financial  statements  in  The  Tailor  for  the 
months  November,  1903,  to  May,  1904,  inclusive. 

»8  The  Tailor,  November,  1907,  p.  12;  December,  1907,  p.  1.  The  assist- 
ance in  this  case  took  the  form  of  contributions  to  the  organizing  funds  of 
various  unions  in  Los  Angeles,  but  was  occasioned  by  the  lockouts. 

»»  Constitution,  1914,  Sees.  81,  82. 

loo  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  90. 


485]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  57 

(3)  The  Executive  Board  has  power  to  terminate  the  pay- 
ment of  strike  benefit  to  a  local  union,  if  in  the  judgment  of  the 
board  the  strike  should  cease,  but  this  action  of  the  board  is 
subject  to  an  appeal  to  a  general  vote,  to  the  next  convention, 
or  to  the  committee  on  laws  and  audit.101 

It  has  been  found  that  if  a  strike  is  to  be  won  at  all,  it  should 
be  won  quickly.  The  longer  it  continues,  the  greater  is  the  op- 
portunity of  the  employer  to  replace  the  men  and  get  his  work 
done.  The  Lennon  administration  was  accustomed  to  advise 
locals  that  as  soon  as  it  became  evident  that  a  strike  could  not  be 
won,  it  should  be  called  off  at  once,  and  the  members  allowed  to 
go  to  work.  It  was  found  that  there  was  a  disposition  after  a 
strike  was  lost  for  the  local  union  to  boycott  the  employer  and 
refuse  permission  to  its  members  to  work  for  him.  This  policy 
was  discouraged  by  the  administration,  on  the  ground  that  it 
would  be  better  to  allow  the  members  to  go  to  work  and  make 
an  effort  to  unionize  the  store  again.  Another  question  of  great 
importance  in  strikes  is  the  question  of  members  on  strike  going 
to  work  in  other  stores  or  leaving  the  city.  This  practice  has 
been  strongly  condemned  by  the  general  officers,  on  the  evident 
ground  that  it  is  impossible  to  maintain  a  strong  front  if  the 
strikers  are  dropping  away  one  by  one.  The  policy  advised  has 
been  to  make  a  brisk  contest  with  the  aid  of  all  the  members  in- 
volved, and  then  if  defeat  is  in  sight,  to  call  off  the  whole  affair 
at  once.  Obvious  as  this  course  seems  to  be,  it  is  surprising  how 
hard  it  has  been  found,  when  men's  stubbornness  was  aroused, 
to  get  a  strike  called  off. 

Members  on  strike  are  not  left  to  their  own  devices  and  with- 
out supervision.  They  are  required  to  report  regularly  to  the 
officers,  and  are  assigned  various  duties  connected  with  the  strike, 
such  as  picketing  and  committee  work.  Every  effort  is  made  to 
give  businesslike  efficiency  to  the  strike. 

(e)  Enforcement  of  strike  regulations 

During  the  period  when  the  conduct  of  the  general  office  was 
under  the  writer's  direct  observation,  there  was  no  instance  in 
which  a  strike  in  violation  of  the  constitution  was  overlooked  by 
the  general  secretary.  In  every  such  case  the  union  was  re- 
minded sharply  of  its  neglect  to  follow  the  usual  rules,  and  was 

101  Ibid.,  Sec.  93. 


58  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [486 

given  to  understand  that  it  was  only  by  a  special  dispensation 
that  the  Executive  Board  could  consider  its  case  at  all ;  and  in  a 
number  of  cases  support  and  strike  benefit  were  refused  alto- 
gether. Carelessness  on  the  part  of  local  unions  in  this  respect 
has  called  forth  more  than  one  vigorous  warning  in  the  columns 
of  the  official  journal.102 

(/)  Avoidance  and  settlement  of  strikes 

The  development  of  new  and  cheaper  systems  of  tailoring,  and 
the  presence  in  the  country  of  large  numbers  of  workers  who 
could  take  the  place  if  necessary  of  skilled  custom  tailors,  have 
made  discretion  peculiarly  necessary  on  the  part  of  the  Tailors' 
Union.  For  many  years  it  has  been  the  policy  of  the  responsible 
officers  to  oppose  absolutely  beginning  a  strike  unless  there  are 
reasonable  prospects  of  success.  The  writer  has  seen  many  let- 
ters from  headquarters  to  local  unions,  implying  strongly  that 
the  central  office,  with  its  wider  viewpoint,  was  in  a  position  to 
perceive  dangers  not  visible  to  the  locals,  particularly  the  pres- 
ence of  potential  strike  breakers  in  neighboring  localities.  An- 
other maxim  that  has  been  strongly  insisted  upon  at  headquar- 
ters has  been:  "Never  break  off  negotiations."  The  general 
office,  by  sending  national  organizers  or  committees  from  neigh- 
boring towns,  has  always  made  every  effort  possible  to  secure  the 
settlement  of  strikes. 

It  has  not  happened  very  frequently  that  state  or  federal  offi- 
cials have  intervened  in  tailors'  strikes,  as  these  strikes  are  not 
usually  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  attract  outside  attention.  It 
is  a  matter  of  interest,  however,  that  the  first  case  considered  by 
the  new  industrial  commission  of  Colorado  was  a  case  involving 
the  journeymen  tailors  of  Denver  and  their  employers.103  The 
journeymen  tailors'  union  of  Denver  having  presented  demands 
to  the  employers,  an  extended  hearing  was  had  before  the  in- 
dustrial commission.  The  necessary  papers  calling  for  an  inves- 

102  Cf.  TJie  Tailor,  September,  1897,  p.  12 ;  March,  1902,  p.  11. 

103  The  Colorado  law  provides  for  investigation  of  industrial  disputes  by 
the  industrial  commission,  and  makes  it  a  misdemeanor  for  the  union  to 
declare  a  strike  or  the  employers  a  lockout  prior  to  or  during  the  investiga- 
tion, provided  the  industry  is  "affected  with  a  public  interest."     Cf.  text 
of  law  in  Bulletin  of  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  Whole  No.  186,  pp. 
105-118. 


487]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  59 

tigation  were  filed  with  the  commission  about  September  30, 
1915,  and  a  reprint  of  its  findings  is  found  in  The  Tailor,  May 
23,  1916.  The  grievances  of  the  tailors,  as  quoted  in  the  com- 
mission 's  report,  were  as  follows :  Low  wages ;  long  hours ;  em- 
ployers not  furnishing  trimmings;  time  lost  on  try-ons;  lack  of 
sanitary  shops ;  bad  light  and  bad  ventilation ;  no  standard  price 
for  tailors'  labor,  compelling  tailors  to  compete  against  each 
other  at  very  low  wages ;  demand  for  extra  pay  for  extras,  over- 
time and  alterations ;  demand  for  recognition  of  the  union.  In 
its  report  the  commission  found  that  the  demands  of  the  journey- 
men tailors  were  "substantially  just."  Some  specific  recommen- 
dations in  the  report  are  as  follows : 

(1)  Increase  in  the  size  of  tailoring  establishments,  so  that 
employers  can  afford  to  furnish  good  shops  and  pay  good  wages. 

(2)  Prohibition  by  state  or  federal  law  of  the  manufacture 
of  clothing  in  the  tailors'  homes. 

(3)  Inauguration  of  the  "team  system"  of  production,  per- 
mitting subdivision  of  work  and  regulation  of  hours. 

(4)  Establishment  of  a  definite  and  uniform  scale  of  wages 
and  a  nine-hour  day. 

The  commission's  report  on  conditions  in  Denver  applies  re- 
markably well  to  other  localities  throughout  the  country.  The 
following  passage  is  especially  significant: 

The  ramifications  of  the  tailoring  industry  are  so  vast  and  varied  as  to 
make  this  business  more  complex  and  difficult  to  handle  than  probably  any 
other  proposition  in  the  United  States.  One  prolific  source  of  trouble  and 
one  hard  to  eradicate  is  the  fact  that  with  a  capital  of  $100  or  $200  many 
a  business  is  launched.  This  insufficiency  of  capital  handicaps  the  new  ad- 
venturer in  this  business.  In  the  first  place  he  has  to  pay  about  50  per  cent 
more  for  his  goods  on  account  of  having  to  buy  in  small  quantities.  The 
heavy  interest  charges  paid  on  borrowed  capital,  high  rental  for  stores, 
etc.,  etc.,  is  so  enormous  and  burdensome  that  many  good  intentioned  and 
industrious  men  lose  their  little  all,  while  those  remaining  eke  out  but  a 
precarious  and  miserable  existence.  With  one,  two  or  three  tailors  working 
in  such  establishments,  it  would  be  utmost  folly  to  expect  that  the  condi- 
tions of  the  tailors  could  be  anything  other  than  hard  and  that  the  pay 
must  of  necessity  be  small.  Because  of  the  facts  that  the  business  can  be 
carried  on  in  the  home  where  the  family  may  assist  in  the  piece  work  system, 
and  that  the  hours,  wages,  etc.,  are  not  up  to  the  standard  of  other  artisans, 
American  labor  has  not  been  attracted  to  this  branch  of  business.  In  Den- 
ver not  one  American  born  tailor  is  employed.  This  being  so  does  not 
relieve  society  of  responsibility,  but  makes  action  to  improve  conditions 


60  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [488 

the  more  imperative  on  all.  The  evidence  before  us  shows  that  during 
the  busy  season  it  is  not  at  all  unusual,  but  is  in  fact  the  universal  cus- 
tom, for  tailors  to  work  from  six-thirty  a.m.  until  nine,  ten  and  eleven 
o'clock  at  night.  It  is  a  sad  commentary  on  American  institutions  to 
think  that  human  beings  could  be  on  such  a  plane  in  this  enlightened 
day.  Working  under  such  a  system  is  inimical  to  society  and  almost  any 
reasonable  action  would  be  justifiable  for  its  elimination.^* 

On  the  subject  of  recognition  of  the  union,  the  commission 
stated  that  of  necessity  it  must  recognize  labor  organizations  as 
representing  employees  in  hearings  before  the  commission,  but 
that  this  ruling  does  not  affect  in  any  way  the  recognition  or  non- 
recognition  of  the  union  by  any  employer. 

Largely  as  the  result  of  the  commission's  findings,  twenty- 
four  merchant  tailors  of  Denver  signed  agreements  with  the 
union,  calling  for  a  nine-hour  day  and  the  "back  shop"  system. 
Only  one  firm,  an  agency  firm  with  headquarters  and  factory  in 
Chicago,  refused  to  sign  the  agreement.  While  some  dissatisfac- 
tion was  expressed  by  the  journeymen  over  delay  in  rendering 
the  decision,  the  findings  of  the  commission  were  very  well  re- 
ceived by  the  men  and  regarded  by  them  as  a  victory.185 


lo*  The  Tailor,  May  23,  1916,  p.  1,  col.  4. 

105  TJt<e  Tailor,  March  21,  1916,  p.  1,  col.  4;  p.  4,  eol.  4. 


489] 


COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING 


61 


(gr)    Statistics  of  Strikes 
Strikes  and  lockouts  in  the  tailoring  trade,  1881-1916  106 


«H 

0 

1 

o 

11 

|1 

PERIOD 

<H 

0 

0 

73 

& 

rr^ 

+3 

£* 

§  /- 

°a 

a  o 
§0 

^ 

•9  > 

£  ss 

S  M 

•^  § 

II 

11 

.11 

to 

£ 

* 

* 

* 

A 

PH 

fc 

Jan.  1,  1881  -Dec.  31,  1886... 

35 

23 

1'2 

2476 

1886 

590 

76 

Aug.  15,  1887  -July  31,  1889. 

40 

35 

5 

$  3,438.00 

Aug.  1,  1889  -July  31,  1891.. 

219 

185 

34 

14,683.01 

Aug.  1,  1891-  June  30,  1893 

150 

135 

15 

24,369.25 

July  1,  1893  -  June  30,  1895  .  . 

27,485.05 

July  1,  1895  -June  30,  1897.. 

12,565.95 

July  1,  1897  -June  30,  1899.. 

40 

33 

7 

1263 

1216 

47 

96 

4,371.00 

July  1,  1899  -June  30,  1901.. 

78 

72 

6 

1846 

1423 

423 

77 

28,463.25 

July  1,  1901  -June  30,  1903.. 

113 

113 

0 

1862 

34,262.50 

July  1,  1903  -Aug.  31  1903 

9,014.00 

Sept.  1,  1903  -Aug.  31,  1904.  . 

24 

18 

6 

1142 

340 

802 

30 

44,315.00 

Sept.  1,  1904  -Aug.  31,  1905.. 

22 

16 

6 

641 

397 

244 

62 

11,414.00 

Sept.  1,  1905  -Aug.  31,  1906.. 

16 

14 

2 

800 

735 

65 

92 

9,676.50 

Sept.  1,  1906  -Aug.  31,  1907.. 

22 

19 

3 

1810 

1400 

410 

77 

21,275.00 

Sept.  1  1907  -Aug.  31,  1908.. 

21 

16 

5 

400 

78,613.85 

Sept.  1,  1908  -Aug.  31,  1909.  . 

18 

15 

3 

500 

420 

80 

84 

12,960.50 

Sept.  1,  1909  -Aug.  31,  1910.. 

17 

12 

5 

706 

588 

118 

83 

6,580.00 

Sept.  1,  1910  -Aug.  31,  1911.. 

13 

8 

5 

169 

139 

30 

82 

9,901.00 

Sept  1  1911  -Aug  31  1912 

11 

6 

5 

504 

52,134.10 

Sept.  1  1912  -Aug.  31,  1913.. 

23 

21 

ft 

728 

57,877.68 

Sept.  l)  1913  -Aug.  31,  1914.. 

7 

7 

0 

12,026.85 

Sept.  1,  1914  -Aug.  31,  1915.. 

5 

5 

0 

50 

15 

35 

30 

6,400.00 

Sept.  1,  1915-  Aug.  31,  1916.  . 

12 

8 

4 

1725 

700 

1025 

60 

57,163.50 

i°«  Source  of  accuracy.  The  figures  for  the  first  period,  covering  six 
years  from  1881  to  1886,  inclusive,  are  taken  from  the  third  annual  report 
of  the  United  States  commissioner  of  labor,  published  in  1887.  These 
figures  cannot  be  regarded  as  exhaustive;  they  appear  to  include  only  the 
most  important  strikes  of  the  period. 

Following  1886  there  is  a  period  of  eight  and  one-half  months,  to  the 
middle  of  August,  1887,  for  which  we  have  no  record.  Beginning  with 
October,  1887,  the  files  of  Tlie  Tailor  are  available,  and  they  give  a  record 
beginning  with  the  convention  which  concluded  on  August  15.  From  this 
point  down  to  June  30,  1903,  the  figures  are  taken  from  the  biennial  reports 
of  the  general  secretary  of  the  Tailors'  Union.  For  the  two  months  from 
July  1  to  August  31,  1903,  the  strike  benefit  has  been  compiled  from  the 
monthly  expense  accounts  in  The  Tailor,  but  the  other  items  are  not  sup- 
plied. Beginning  with  September  1,  1903,  the  reports  found  in  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  annual  conventions  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  have 
been  followed.  These  reports  were  furnished  by  the  general  secretary  of 


62  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [490 

Supplementary  statistics  of  strikes,   1909-1913 

The  above  table  does  not  indicate  the  number  of  cases  in  which 
the  unions  were  able  to  gain  all  or  a  part  of  their  demands  by 
peaceable  negotiations,  nor  does  it  indicate  the  causes  of  strikes. 
Information  of  this  kind  is  not  at  hand  except  for  the  four  years 
beginning  July  1,  1909,  and  ending  June  30,  1913.  For  this 
period  the  following  data  are  given  by  Secretary  Brais  in  his 
1913  report : 107 


the  Tailors'  Union  to  the  secretary  of  the  federation,  and  are  slightly  more 
complete  than  those  published  by  the  Tailors  in  their  own  journal.  There 
are  a  few  gaps  in  the  table,  which  are  explained  by  the  lack  of  definite 
information  for  the  periods  in  question.  In  connection  with  all  figures 
furnished  by  the  secretary  of  the  Tailors,  it  should  be  noted  that  they  are 
not  to  be  accepted  as  mathematically  exact,  but  are  based  upon  the  best 
data  that  the  secretary  was  able  to  obtain  from  the  expense  accounts  of 
the  national  union  and  from  the  correspondence  with  local  unions  regarding 
the  strikes.  It  is  believed  that  the  figures  are  fairly  reliable  for  purposes 
of  comparison. 

Definitions  and  notation.  A  disturbance  originating  in  several  stores  in 
a  given  city  at  about  the  same  date  is  counted  as  a  single  strike.  The 
writer  has  followed  the  practice  of  the  officers  of  the  Tailors'  Union  in  this 
matter.  Where  necessary  the  reports  of  the  United  States  commissioner  of 
labor  have  been  modified  to  agree  with  this  method  of  recording  strikes. 

Each  strike  has  been  counted  in  the  period  during  which  it  terminated. 
This  is  necessary  in  order  to  tabulate  the  results.  Strike  records  are  based 
largely  upon  benefit  paid,  and  strikes  lasting  only  a  few  days,  so  that  no 
benefit  was  due  under  the  union  laws,  are  not,  as  a  rule,  counted  at  all. 

Strikes  by  which  the  journeymen  secured  all  or  a  part  of  their  demands, 
or  by  which  reductions  or  other  aggressions  upon  the  part  of  the  employers 
were  successfully  resisted,  are  listed  as  "won  or  compromised."  Strikes 
where  the  men  went  back  to  work  without  securing  any  of  their  demands,  or 
where  they  were  obliged  to  accept  reductions,  are  listed  as  "lost."  Mem- 
bers involved  in  won  or  compromised  strikes  are  held  to  have  been  "bene- 
fited. ' '  Members  involved  in  lost  strikes  are  held  to  have  been  ' '  not 
benefited."  The  term  "benefited"  in  this  connection  refers  to  the  direct 
result  of  the  strike  in  question;  no  attempt  is  made  to  estimate  the  absolute 
results  of  strikes,  or  to  balance  gains  in  wages  and  conditions  against  losses 
of  time  and  expenses  of  union  maintenance. 

107  The  Tailor,  August,  1913. 


491]  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  63 

Results  of  negotiations  with  employers 
Number   of  eases   of  negotiation   or   dispute   in   which  the   local 

union  was  sustained  by  the  General  Executive  Board  108 287 

Number  of  eases  in  which  the  local  unions  secured  gains  with- 
out  strike 195 

Number  of  cases  involving  ' '  victimized ' '  members  109 22 

Number  of  eases  resulting  in  strikes  and  lockouts 70 

Total 287 

Results  of  strikes  and  lockouts 

Won   39 

Compromised    3 

Lost 26 

Pending  at  close  of  term 2 

Total 70 

Causes  of  strikes  and  lockouts 
Cause  Number 

Demand   for  increased   wages 30 

Union    shop   question 7 

Change  of  system  of  production 7 

Discharge   of   unionists 5 

Reduction   of   wages  threatened 3 

Dispute   over  hours    of   labor 2 

Violation  of  agreement  by  employers 1 

Employers  sending  work  out  of  shop 1 

Demand  for  free  workshop 1 

Two  or  more   of   above   causes   combined 10 

Record  of  causes  incomplete 3 

Total  strikes  and  lockouts 70 

No  further  report  of  a  character  similar  to  the  above  will  be 
prepared  before  the  1917  convention,  and  detailed  data  for  1913- 
1917  will  therefore  hardly  be  available  for  the  present  thesis. 

108  Exclusive  of  cases  in  which  the  union,  after  applying  for  support, 
dropped  the  matter,  and  of  cases  in  which  the  union  failed  to  report  the 
outcome. 

109  These  cases  were  connected  with  trivial  disputes  involving  the  dis- 
charge  of  one  or  more  unionists,  where  the  national   union  assisted   the 
discharged  members  financially,  but  did  not  authorize  any  strikes  in  their 
behalf. 


64  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [492 

5.      CONCLUDING  NOTE 

The  results  of  collective  bargaining  in  the  tailoring  trade  ap- 
pear in  some  respects  to  be  disappointing,  as  compared  with  the 
results  secured  by  unions  in  other  trades.  It  must  be  recalled, 
however,  that  the  Tailors'  Union  has  been  confronted  with  a  sit- 
uation in  which  very  numerous  handicaps  to  trade  union  success 
have  existed.  This  union  has  been  obliged  to  face  a  declining 
industry,  because  of  the  substitution  of  cheaper  systems  of  pro- 
ducing clothing.  These  cheaper  systems  were  so  organized  as  to 
permit  of  the  employment  of  large  numbers  of  immigrant  and 
women  laborers  at  comparatively  low  wages.  Moreover,  as  we 
have  seen,  the  piece  system,  coupled  with  the  system  of  taking 
work  to  the  tailors'  homes,  under  the  seasonal  conditions  of  the 
trade,  has  prevented  in  a  very  large  measure  the  standardization 
of  hours  and  working  conditions.  Under  all  these  circumstances, 
it  is  surprising  that  the  Tailors  have  succeeded  as  well  as  they 
have  in  avoiding  utter  demoralization  of  their  trade,  and  we  may 
well  question  whether,  in  the  absence  of  that  kind  of  conservative 
leadership  which  has  been  described,  the  organization  could  have 
existed  at  all. 


CHAPTER  II 
HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES 

1.      DEFINITIONS  AND  TERMINOLOGY 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out1  that  as  a  rule,  where  the 
journeyman  tailor  works  with  help,  the  help  is  hired  by  the  jour- 
neyman himself,  and  not  by  the  employer.  This  system  appears 
to  have  originated  with  the  taking  of  work  by  the  journeyman 
away  from  the  employer's  place  of  business,  and  has  made  the 
problem  of  assistants  in  the  tailoring  trade  somewhat  different 
from  the  same  problem  in  a  majority  of  other  trades.2 

According  to  the  terminology  employed  in  the  trade,  tailors' 
assistants  are  divided  into  two  classes :  (1)  helpers,  (2)  appren- 
tices. The  following  explanation  has  been  given  to  the  writer 
by  an  experienced  tailor : 3 

The  difference  between  a  helper  and  apprentice  is  that  the  former  only 
works  at  the  trade  temporarily,  while  the  latter  learns  the  trade  with  the 
intention  of  following  it  as  a  journeyman  or  with  the  intention  of  later 
learning  cutting,  as  tailors  call  it,  which  includes  drafting  of  a  garment 
before  it  is  cut.  Helpers  are  for  the  most  part  females.  A  young  boy 
starting  to  work  with  a  journeyman  tailor  is  sometimes  called  a  helper, 
but  they  in  nearly  every  case  become  apprentices,  unless  they  find  the  trade 
too  onerous  and  confining  and  quit  learning. 

Tailors  who  come  from  the  countries  of  Europe  learn  the  trade  before 
coming  here.  Those  who  come  here  do  in  most  instances  work  for  a  journey- 
man tailor  &s  helper  for  a  season  or  part  of  one  in  order  to  acquire  knowl- 
edge of  the  methods  used  in  this  country  making  garments.  They,  however, 
are  not  considered  either  helpers  or  apprentices,  although  called  helpers. 
They  are  merely  learning  the  details  of  making  a  garment;  the  funda- 
mentals they  have  already  learned.  It  is  not  essential  that  a  newcomer 

1  Supra,  p.  29. 

2  For  a  discussion  of  other  trades  in  which  the  assistants  are,  or  have 
been,  employed  by  the  journeymen,  ef.  J.  H.  Ashworth,  The  Helper  and 
American  Trade  Unions,  in  Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Historical 
and  Political  Science,  Series  33,  1915,  pp.  68-77. 

3  A.  T.  Carlquist,  formerly  assistant  secretary  in  the  general  office  of  the 
Journeymen  Tailors'  Union. 

65 


66  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [494 

does  as  above  related,  but  it  gives  him  more  confidence  in  himself  to  hold 
a  job. 

To  one  not  familiar  with  the  tailoring  trade,  there  is  no  way  to  dis- 
tinguish between  an  apprentice  and  a  helper,  but  the  experienced  tailor 
going  into  a  shop  could  soon  tell  which  was  which  by  noticing  the  work  they 
were  doing. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  term  "apprentice"  is  here  used  in 
the  sense  of  a  learner,  and  not  in  the  sense  of  a  person  bound  to 
a  master  workman  for  a  given  period  of  years. 

2.      REGULATION    OF   HELPERS   AND   APPRENTICES 

The  regulation  of  helpers  and  apprentices  by  the  organized 
tailors  has  been  recognized  as  a  matter  belonging  primarily  un- 
der the  jurisdiction  of  the  local  unions.  Where  the  national 
union  has  passed  regulations  on  this  subject,  it  has  intended  to 
prescribe  the  limits  within  which  local  union  control  should 
operate,  rather  than  to  remove  such  control  altogether. 

Regulations  on  the  subject  of  helpers  and  apprentices  passed 
by  the  national  union  between  1883  and  the  present  date  may  be 
classified  according  to  subject  matter  as  follows: 

(1)  Eligibility  of  helpers  and  apprentices  to  membership  in 
the  union; 

(2)  Compulsory  admission  of  helpers  and  apprentices; 

(3)  Standardization  of  preparation  and  skill; 

(4)  Limitation  of  the  number  of  helpers  and  apprentices ; 

(5)  Duties  and  privileges  of  apprentices  in  local  unions; 

(6)  Dues  of  apprentices  to  the  national  union. 

The  regulations  will  be  discussed  under  the  above  heads,  and 
then  an  effort  will  be  made  to  interpret  these  regulations  with 
reference  to  their  purpose  and  significance  in  the  policy  of  the 
union. 

(1)  Eligibility  of  helpers  and  apprentices.  The  1884,  1885 
and  1887  constitutions  of  the  Tailors'  Union  contained  no  ex- 
press provision  either  for  or  against  the  admission  of  helpers 
and  apprentices  to  membership,  and  during  this  period  the  mat- 
ter was  entirely  under  local  union  regulation.  There  is  evidence, 
however,  that  in  some  localities  there  was  a  prejudice  against 
the  admission  of  women  to  the  union,  and  this  would  have  oper- 
ated against  the  admission  of  women  helpers.  For  example,  in 
1888  there  was  a  split  in  the  Houston,  Texas,  local  union  over 


495]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  67 

the  question  of  admission  of  women.4    This  incident  called  forth 
the  following  comment  from  the  general  secretary  :5 

Many  tailors  will  not  permit  women  to  belong  to  their  unions.  This 
seems  to  us  to  be  both  unjust  and  unwise.  If  they  work  at  the  trade  they 
should  be  in  the  union  and  under  its  control,  should  pay  their  dues  and 
fulfill  all  obligations  of  full  members,  and  should  receive  for  their  work 
the  same  pay  as  men  for  the  same  work. 

In  his  report  to  the  1889  convention 6  the  secretary  again  rec- 
ommended that  women  be  made  eligible  to  membership.  The 
convention  adopted  this  recommendation  and  amended  the  con- 
stitution 7  so  as  to  provide  specifically  for  the  eligibility  of  jour- 
neymen tailors,  helpers  and  apprentices,  whether  male  or  fe- 
male.8 Even  after  the  passage  of  this  amendment  there  seems 
to  have  been  some  discrimination  against  women  members.  In 
his  1891  report 9  the  secretary  found  it  necessary  to  recommend 
that  women  be  granted  the  same  protection  and  benefits  under 
the  constitution  as  men,  and  that  in  the  case  of  women  helpers, 
when  an  advance  in  wages  was  received  by  the  union,  the  helpers 
should  be  given  their  full  proportion.  The  1891  convention  did 
not  approve  unqualifiedly  this  recommendation,  but  adopted  the 
following  report  of  the  committee  on  officers'  reports:10 

Women  members:  Your  committee  approves  of  this  section  with  the 
exception  of  women  helpers.  This  question  to  be  left  at  the  discretion  of 
the  L.  IL,  and  we  recommend  that  this  convention  does  not  encourage 
women  helpers. 

Following  1891  the  prejudice  against  the  admission  of  women 
helpers  does  not  appear  in  any  official  recommendation,  and  in 
1893,  as  we  shall  see,  the  question  was  definitely  disposed  of. 

(2)  Compulsory  admission  of  helpers  and  apprentices.  Ad- 
mission of  helpers  and  apprentices  to  membership  remained  op- 
tional with  the  local  unions  until  1893,  when  the  convention  pro- 

4  The  Tailor,  November,  1888,  p.  7,  col.  3. 

s  Ibid. 

«  The  Tailor,  September,  1889,  p.  1. 

7  Up  to  and  including  1889,  the  convention  had  power  to  amend  the  con- 
stitution without  a  referendum  vote.  Following  1889  all  amendments  were 
submitted  to  the  membership  for  approval  or  rejection. 

s  Constitution,  1889,  Art.   VI.,  Sec.   1. 

9  The  Tailor,  August,  1891,  p.  2. 

10  The  Tailor,  August,  1891,  p.  3,  col.  4,  report  of  committee  on  officers' 
reports;  p.  4,  col.  1,  action  of  convention  on  13th  and  17th  sections. 


68  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [496 

posed  the  following  amendment,  which  was  approved  by  refer- 
endum vote:11 

A  candidate  to  be  admitted  to  membership  in  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  by  a 
Li.  U.  must  be  a  journeyman  tailor  or  tailoress,  apprentice  or  helper,  and  all 
apprentices  or  helpers  working  with  members  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  18  years 
of  age  or  over  must  become  members. 

This  section  remained  the  same  in  effect  until  1914,12  when 
the  age  limit  was  removed,  making  membership  of  all  helpers 
compulsory.13  In  1902  the  journeyman  tailor  employing  the 
helper  or  apprentice  was  made  responsible,  under  penalty  of  a 
fine,  for  seeing  that  the  assistant  joined  the  union,14  and  this 
provision,  with  one  or  two  slight  modifications,15  has  remained  in 
force  until  the  present  date. 

(3)  Standardization  of  preparation  and  skill.  In  his  report 
to  the  1891  convention,  Secretary  Lennon  indicated  that  "ap- 
prentices should  not  be  allowed  to  work  as  journeymen  until 
they  are  really  tailors. " 16  No  definite  action,  however,  on  this 
point  was  taken  until  the  meeting  of  the  1897  committee  on  laws 
and  audit,  when  the  following  amendment  was  proposed,  and 
passed  by  the  membership:17 

Apprentices  shall  be  bound  either  verbally  or  by  writing  as  the  laws  of 
the  various  states  or  provinces  may  provide,  for  a  period  of  not  less  than 
three  years,  and  a  clear  book  shall  not  be  issued  by  any  L.  U.  to  an  appren- 
tice after  their  time  has  expired  unless  their  work  be  acceptable  to  a  com- 
mittee of  the  L.  U.  and  if  found  by  the  committee  as  efficient  a  certificate 
of  efficiency  shall  be  issued  to  the  apprentice  over  a  seal  of  the  local  signed 
by  the  President  and  Corresponding  Secretary. 

11  Constitution,  1894,  Sec.  26. 

12  Cf.  Constitution,  1895,  Sec.  25;    1896,  See.  25;   1898,  Sec.  32;   1900, 
Sec.  31;  1902,  Sec.  30;  1904,  Sec.  34;  1905,  Sec.  34;  1908,  Sec.  34;  1910, 
Sec.  33. 

is  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  33:  "All  workers  must  become  members." 
The  proposition  as  submitted  to  a  general  vote  in  1913  read:  "All  helpers 
must  become  members,"  and  it  was  passed  in  this  form.  The  writer  is 
unable  to  account  for  the  change  in  wording,  unless  it  was  due  to  the  pas- 
sage of  another  amendment  at  the  same  time,  which  read :  ' '  All  help 
working  at  the  trade  for  contractors  or  sub-bosses  must  become  members  of 
the  union."  Cf.  The  Tailor,  September,  1913,  p.  6,  Proposition  No.  12; 
p.  5,  Proposition  No.  9;  vote,  November,  1913,  supplement. 

i*  Constitution,  1902,  Sec.    22. 

is  Constitution,  1910,  Sec.  23;  1914,  Sec.  12. 

is  The  Tailor,  August,  1891,  p.  2. 

17  Constitution,  1898,  Sec.  23. 


497]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  69 

This  amendment  remained  in  force  until  1903,  when  it  was 
stricken  out.18  In  commenting  upon  the  proposal  to  strike  out, 
the  secretary  said:  "There  are  no  conditions  in  a  legal  sense 
regarding  apprentices  that  warrant  the  continuance  of  any  such 
action."19 

(4)  Limitation  of  the  number  of  helpers  and  apprentices. 
Prior  to  1898  the  regulation  of  the  number  of  helpers  and  ap- 
prentices was  left  entirely  to  the  local  unions.  There  is  no  in- 
formation at  hand  to  indicate  to  what  extent  this  regulation  had 
gone  before  this  date.  An  official  report  in  1889  appears  to  indi- 
cate that  in  the  best  class  of  stores  at  any  rate  some  effort  had 
been  made  to  limit  the  number  of  helpers  to  one  to  each  jour- 
neyman, or  even  to  prohibit  helpers  altogether.20  In  his  1891 
report  the  general  secretary  said,  referring  to  the  subject  of  ap- 
prentices and  helpers : 21 

With  home  work  so  largely  prevalent  among  tailors,  but  little  control 
can  be  had  by  our  union  on  either  subject,  but  where  the  unions  have  the 
rule  in  force  that  all  work  shall  be  made  on  the  employers'  premises,  not 
more  than  one  helper  or  apprentice  should  be  allowed  to  each  journeyman. 

And  in  his  1893  report:22 

The  limitation  of  the  number  of  helpers  and  apprentices  should  receive 
your  consideration.  The  present  system  in  some  cities  is  really  nothing 
but  the  sweating  system  and  should  be  abolished.  Whatever  the  limit  that 
may  be  made  by  this  convention,  it  should  be  binding  on  every  union,  and 
tailors  that  wish  to  be  sweaters  should  get  outside  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A. 

Neither  the  1891  nor  the  1893  convention  saw  fit  to  enact  any 
legislation  on  this  subject.  There  was  no  convention  or  legisla- 

is  The  Tailor,  September,  1903,  p.  2,  Proposition  No.  5 ;  vote,  November, 
1903,  supplement. 

19  The  Tailor,  September,  1903,  p.  5,  comment  on  Proposition  No.  5.    Cf. 
the  following  from  Lindley  D.  Clark,  The  Law  of  the  Employment  of  Labor, 
p.  23: 

"Practically  all  the  states  have  laws  relating  to  apprentices  and  the 
regulation  and  enforcement  of  contracts  with  them.  These  laws  generally 
prescribe  the  term  of  indenture,  the  duties  of  the  master  as  to  training, 
education,  and  the  payment  of  the  stipulated  amount  on  the  expiration  of 
the  term.  .  .  .  These  laws  are  practically  obsolete  at  the  present  time, 
contracts  between  employers  and  unskilled  men  or  boys  learning  trades 
being  for  the  most  part  governed  by  the  rules  of  law  generally  applicable 
to  labor  contracts." 

20  The  Tailor,  September,  1889,  p.  1,  report  on  ' '  Conditions  in  our  trade. ' ' 

21  TJie  Tailor,  August,  1891,  p.  2. 

22  The  Tailor,  August,  1893,  p.  2. 


70  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [498 

tive  committee  meeting  between  1893  and  1897,  but  in  1897  the 
committee  on  laws  and  audit  proposed  the  following  amendment, 
which  was  approved  on  referendum  vote:23 

Each  local  union  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  shall  have  power  to  forbid  the 
employment  of  any  helpers  in  their  respective  jurisdictions,  but  no  L.  U. 
shall  have  power  to  allow  any  member  to  employ  more  than  one  helper  or 
one  apprentice. 

Subsequent  legislation  by  the  Tailors'  Union  on  the  subject 
of  limiting  the  number  of  helpers  and  apprentices  falls  into  two 
classes:  (a)  amendments  providing  for  relaxation  of  the  ''one 
helper  rule,"  on  account  of  the  difficulty  of  enforcing  the  same 
in  certain  localities,  resulting  finally  in  the  return  to  the  former 
system  of  regulation  by  the  local  unions;  (b)  positive  legislation 
designed  to  prevent,  rather  than  to  promote,  the  limitation  by 
local  unions  of  helpers  in  localities  where  such  limitation  was 
regarded  by  the  national  officials  as  a  handicap  to  union  progress. 

The  first  amendment  in  the  direction  of  relaxing  the  one 
helper  limit  was  passed  in  1903,  and  provided  as  follows  :24 

In  cities  where  organizing  work  is  being  carried  on  by  the  local  union 
or  by  the  general  organizers,  and  conditions  existing  in  the  trade  in  such 
cities  make  it  impossible  to  thoroughly  organize  the  craft  with  the  one 
helper  limit,  with  the  consent  of  the  Gr.  E.  B.  Section  23  can  be  suspended 
in  such  city  until  conditions  and  prices  can  be  so  improved  as  to  warrant 
the  enforcement  of  the  one  helper  limit,  and  all  persons  working  at  the 
trade  in  such  case  shall  be  eligible  to  membership. 

This  section  was  repealed  in  1909,  and  the  following  substi- 
tuted :25 

In  cities  where  conditions  regarding  helpers  and  apprentices  as  fixed  by 
the  existing  L.  U.  prevent  a  thorough  organization  of  the  trade,  the  Gr.  E. 
B.  shall  have  power,  if  found  necessary  after  a  careful  investigation,  to 
issue  a  charter  to  another  L.  IT. 

At  the  same  time  the  section  forbidding  local  unions  to  allow 
more  than  one  helper  or  one  apprentice  to  each  journeyman  was 
repealed,  and  the  matter  was  left  specifically  to  the  control  of  the 
local  unions.26  Finally,  provision  was  made  for  the  admission  of 
"contractors  or  sub-bosses"  to  membership  in  the  national  union 

23  Constitution,  1898,  Sec.  22. 

24  Constitution,  1904,  Sec.  24. 

25  Constitution,  1910,  Sec.  24. 

26  The  Tailor,  August,  1909,  p.  40,  Proposition  No.  3 ;  Constitution,  1910, 
Sec.  23. 


499]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  71 

as  passive  members  ;27  contractors  or  sub-bosses  being  defined  as 
tailors  employing  more  than  one  helper.28  This  amendment  made 
it  possible  for  tailors  employing  more  than  one  helper  to  secure 
membership  in  the  national  union,  even  though  debarred  from 
membership  in  the  local;  thus  marking  the  last  step  in  the  re- 
action from  the  original  limitations.  No  further  changes  of  an 
important  character  were  made,  except  to  substitute  the  word 
"finishers"  for  "apprentices"  in  the  section  governing  helpers 
and  apprentices,  making  this  section  read:  "helpers  and  finish- 
ers, ' '  instead  of  ' '  helpers  and  apprentices ; ' '  the  intention  of  this 
change  being  probably  to  include  apprentices  under  "helpers," 
and  to  make  sure  that  persons  employed  as  finishers  would  be 
brought  into  the  union  as  well  as  regular  helpers.29 

The  attempt  to  regulate  the  number  of  helpers  and  appren- 
tices in  shops  employing  the  weekly  system,  where  helpers  and 
apprentices  are  under  the  control  of  the  employer,  took  a  course 
similar  to  that  followed  in  the  case  of  pieceworkers'  helpers. 
An  amendment  was  passed  in  1905  providing  that  "no  helpers 
shall  be  employed  by  the  men  working  under  the  weekly  system, 
and  under  no  consideration  shall  more  than  one  helper  or  ap- 
prentice be  allowed  to  each  man,"30  but  this  amendment  was 
repealed  in  1907.31  At  present  the  union  exercises  only  such 
control  over  assistants  in  weekly  shops  as  may  be  secured  locally 
through  agreement  with  the  employer.32 

(5)  Duties  and  privileges  of  apprentices  in  local  unions.  In 
1901  an  amendment  was  passed  providing  that  "no  regularly 
bound  apprentice  shall  have  a  vote  upon  any  administrative 
question  before  the  local  union,  nor  shall  they  be  required  to  pay 

27  Passive  members  are  allowed  to  remain  in  benefit  in  the  national  union 
by  paying  the  national  dues  and  levies,  but  are  debarred  from  attending 
local  meetings  unless  requested  by  the  local  union,  and  are  excused  from 
payment  of  local  dues.  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  55. 

as  Constitution,  1910,  Sec.  56. 

29  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  12. 

so  Constitution,  1905,  Sec.  77. 

si  The  Tailor,  September,  1907,  p.  7,  Proposition  No.  7;  vote,  November 
1907,  supplement. 

32  For  example,  in  union  shops  in  Seattle  employing  the  weekly  system 
the  rule  is  one  apprentice  to  every  twelve  employees.  The  Tailor,  April  10, 
1917,  p.  3. 


72  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [500 

local  dues. ' ' 33    This  was  replaced  in  1904  by  the  following : 34 
It   shall  be  optional  with  each  local  union  to  excuse  apprentices  and 
helpers  from  payment  of  all  or  a  part  of  the  local  dues.     Apprentices  or 
helpers  shall  not  have  the  right  to  vote  on  this  question. 

Changes  since  1904  have  eliminated  this  provision,  but  it  is  prob- 
ably held  to  be  included  in  the  following  provision  of  the  present 
law :  ' '  All  local  unions  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  shall  have  the  power 
to  regulate  the  employment  of  helpers  and  finishers  in  their 
respective  jurisdictions."35 

(6)  Dues  of  helpers  and  apprentices  to  the  national  union. 
In  1913  a  rule  was  enacted  permitting  helpers  and  apprentices 
employed  at  a  wage  of  less  than  $12.00  per  week  to  pay  40  cents 
a  month  dues  to  the  national  union,  instead  of  the  regular  dues 
of  65  cents  a  month,  provided  they  would  waive  the  sick  and 
death  benefits.36  This  amendment  was  significant  mainly  as  an 
incident  to  the  effort  to  establish  an  industrial  union,  and  will 
be  discussed  in  that  connection.37 

3.      INTERPRETATION    OF   UNION   REGULATIONS 

In  endeavoring  to  interpret  the  regulations  of  the  Tailors' 
Union  on  the  subject  of  helpers  and  apprentices,  it  is  necessary, 
first,  to  indicate  the  purposes  served,  or  intended  to  be  served, 
by  the  regulations  as  first  passed ;  and  second,  to  account  for  the 
retrograde  movement,  by  which  practically  all  regulation  on  the 
part  of  the  national  union  was  abandoned. 

The  purposes  of  the  regulations  passed  by  the  national  union 
seem  to  have  been  principally  the  following: 

(1)  To  standardize  preparation  for  the  tailoring  trade,  and 
prevent  imperfectly  trained  workers  from  posing  as  skilled  jour- 
neymen ; 

(2)  To  avoid  a  surplus  of  journeymen  tailors  by  limiting 
the  number  of  learners ; 

(3)  To  prevent  a  reduction  of  the  demand  for  skilled  men  on 
account  of  their  work  being  done  by  helpers;  or,  what  amounts 
to  the  same  thing  economically,  to  prevent  journeymen  taking 

ss  Constitution,  1902,  Sec.  23. 

34  Constitution,  1904,  See.  14. 

35  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  12. 
3«  Constitution,  1914,  Sec.  25. 
37  Cf.  infra,  pp.  103-104. 


501]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  73 

advantage  of  one  another  by  employing  a  number  of  helpers 
and  getting  more  than  their  ' '  share ' '  of  the  work ; 

(4)  To  oblige  helpers  and  apprentices  to  assume  union  obli- 
gations, since  indirectly  they  profited  by  union  conditions; 

(5)  To  educate  helpers  and  apprentices  in  union  principles, 
and  prevent  their  acting  against  the  union  in  strikes. 

Since  some  of  the  regulations  had  more  than  one  purpose,  and 
some  of  the  purposes  named  were  served  by  more  than  one  regu- 
lation, it  would  be  cumbersome  to  relate  the  regulations  to  their 
purposes  in  complete  detail.  We  shall  endeavor  to  indicate  only 
the  more  important  connections,  leaving  the  reader  to  supply  the 
others  for  himself: 

(1)  To  standardize  preparation  for  the  tailoring  trade.    It 
has  already  been  noted  that  an  effort  was  made  to  accomplish 
this  object  by  cooperation  with  state  laws  designed  to  fit  the  old 
systems  of  indentures  and  fixed  terms  of  apprenticeship,  and  that 
this  effort  was  abandoned  on  account  of  the  obsolescence  of  the 
old  legal  system.    At  the  present  time  there  is  no  standardization 
except  that  which  is  imposed  by  the  merchant  tailor  or  cutter,38 
and  as  a  result  standards  of  skill  in  the  tailoring  trade  have  been 
very  considerably  demoralized. 

(2)  To  avoid  a  surplus  of  journeymen  tailors  by  limiting  the 
number  of  learners.     In  this  connection  the  rule  should  be  re- 
called which  was  in  force  for  a  time,  whereby  only  one  appren- 
tice or  one  helper  was  allowed  to  each  journeyman.    While  there 
were  other  reasons  for  the  limitation  to  one  helper,  which  we 
shall  consider  shortly,  the  fact  that  the  helper  was  a  potential 
apprentice  made  the  limitation  of  helpers  as  well  as  the  limita- 
tion of  apprentices  desirable  for  the  purpose  that  we  are  now 
considering.    However,  in  the  writer's  opinion,  the  rules  of  the 
union  have  been  far  less  potent  than  other  causes  in  bringing 
about  the  limitation  of  the  number  of  apprentices.39     These 

38  ' '  There  is  no  system  of  examination  of  apprentices  in  tailoring,  except 
that  one  must  be  competent  to  make  a  garment  in  accord  with  the  ideas  of 
the  cutter  or  the  boss,  either  of  whom  does  the  examining  afer  the  job  is 
finished.  That  is  examination  enough.  No  two  cutters  have  the  same  ideas 
as  to  details  of  the  making  of  a  job."  A.  T.  Carlquist,  correspondence, 
November  5,  1916. 

3»  As  far  as  we  can  discover,  the  number  of  apprentices  actually  learning 
the  trade  with  union  men  has  been  published  on  only  two  dates,  August, 


74  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [502 

other  causes  will  be  considered  in  the  last  section  of  this  chapter, 
in  connection  with  the  present  shortage  of  skilled  tailors. 

(3)  To  prevent  a  reduction  of  the  demand  for  skilled  men  on 
account  of  their  work  being  done  by  helpers;  to  prevent  jour- 
neymen taking  advantage  of  one  another  by  employing  a  number 
of  helpers  and  getting  more  than  their  " share"  of  the  work. 

These  two  objects  are  discussed  together,  for  the  reason  that 
they  are  not  economically  distinct,  and  together  they  constituted 
the  principal  motive  for  limitation  of  the  number  of  helpers. 
The  literature  of  the  Tailors'  Union  contains  many  interesting 
accounts  of  the  conditions  which  led  to  the  attempt  at  this  kind 
of  limitation.  The  following  extract  indicates  the  situation  in 
certain  large  cities  in  1891,  as  indicated  by  reports  of  union 
organizers  :40 

As  we  were  going  from  house  to  house  to  see  the  tailors  for  the  purpose 
of  getting  them  to  join  the  union,  we  met  some  that  were  more  than  willing 
to  join,  but,  they  said,  we  have  not  done  anything  for  six  weeks,  so  you  see 
that  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  join  at  the  present  time. 

Others  we  saw  at  different  times  that  worked  for  the  same  firms,  who 
were  busy  when  we  called  on  them ;  yes,  they  had  three  or  four  coats  all  the 
time,  and  some  of  them  had  their  wives,  sistera-in-law,  and  three  helpers, 
helping  them. 

Now,  if  the  principles  of  union  were  enforced  in  this  case,  this  would 
not  be,  for  they  would  all  receive  work. 

It  also  happens  that  during  the  dull  season  a  suit  of  clothes  must  be 
done  on  short  notice,  so  the  one  that  has  the  helpers  will  get  the  job.  This 
could  also  be  done  away  with  if  we  had  the  back-shops,  for  then  two  or 
three  good  men  would  have  a  chance  to  work  a  day  or  two. 

In  the  city  of  Cincinnati,  there  is  one  vest  maker,  who  has  eight  helpers, 
who  make  one  hundred  and  ten  vests  a  week,  and  in  Cleveland  there  is  a 
pants  maker,  who  with  thirteen  helpers,  working  for  seven  different  firms, 

1903,  and  January,  1912.  On  the  first  date,  Secretary  Lennon,  basing  his 
statement  on  the  returns  from  a  questionnaire  sent  out  to  local  unions, 
reported  that  there  were  approximately  625  apprentices  learning  the  trade 
with  union  men  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Tailors'  Union.  The  total 
membership  of  the  union  at  this  date  was  about  14,500.  This  indicated  an 
average  of  about  one  apprentice  to  every  23  members.  In  January,  1912, 
returns  from  a  questionnaire  sent  out  by  the  writer  indicated  that  with 
5,323  members  reporting  (about  40  per  cent  of  the  entire  membership  at 
this  date),  there  were  180  apprentices,  or  about  one  to  every  thirty  mem- 
bers. Cf.  The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  5;  Stowell,  op.  tit.,  pp.  152-155,  158. 
40  The  Tailor,  July,  1891,  p.  5,  col.  4,  article  on  ' '  How  to  organize  the 
tailors,"  by  M.  Bantz,  organizer. 


503]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  75 

tutns  out  one  hundred  and  forty-five  to  fifty  pair  of  pants  a  week.  Now 
if  this  work  were  done  by  practical  tailors,  it  would  give  in  the  former  case 
employment  to  sixteen,  and  in  the  latter  to  twenty-six  men. 

The  exploitation  of  female  labor  at  about  the  same  date  is 
indicated  by  the  following:41 

The  employment  of  female  help  is  not  necessarily  an  evil  if  limited  to 
one  help,  but  the  selfishness  and  greed  of  many  has  led  to  its  abuse,  and  it 
is  a  well-known  fact,  more  particularly  in  pants  making,  one  man  runs  a 
little  factory  by  employing  as  many  as  four  and  six  girls.  The  man  who 
employs  them  is  making  money  out  of  them. 

Finally,  we  quote  an  article  from  a  Chicago  tailor,  indicating 
conditions  in  that  city  in  1892 :42 

Custom  tailoring  is  manipulated  at  present  in  a  way  that  can  safely  be 
classed  in  the  sweating  system.  In  Chicago  there  are  a  great  number  of 
even  union  tailors  who  employ  helpers  in  their  private  holies,  or  in  places 
engaged  for  the  purpose  of  manufacturing  custom  tailoring  garments,  and 
the  old  custom  of  applying  individual  artistic  labor  in  the  production  of 
fine  tailoring  is  being  more  and  more  pushed  to  the  wall,  and  consequently 
made  unprofitable  to  those  engaged  therein,  by  the  other  method  of  working 
in  gangs,  with  trimmers,  machine  operators,  pressers  and  finishers. 

There  is  in  Chicago  a  manifest  tendency  towards  this,  especially  so  in 
the  making  of  trousers  and  vests.  From  personal  observation  I  know  that 
only  about  five  per  cent  of  trousers  makers  in  Chicago  are  actually  engaged 
in  the  making  to  completion,  in  every  detail  of  the  work,  the  above  men- 
tioned garment.  This  is  even  more  so  in  the  vest  making  line,  I  can  safely 
say,  not  having  found  in  ten  years  as  many  as  twelve  vest  makers  who 
individually  completed  their  job;  in  passing,  I  will  remark  that  this  holds 
only  good  where  the  question  is  about  men.  Women  vest  makers  do,  as  a 
rule,  work  single-handed;  only  a  few  of  them  have  I  seen  to  employ  helpers 
on  any  large  scale  worth  mentioning.  Coat  making  in  fine  tailoring  is  prac- 
tised in  the  same  way,  if  not  in  so  great  proportion;  as  in  this  line,  it 
appears,  a  man  is  guaranteed  better  and  steadier  wages,  even  if  he  is 
working  single  handed,  than  in  the  vest  and  trousers  department  of  the 
trade.  Notwithstanding  this  a  great  number  of  our  union  coatmakers  do 
employ  helpers;  even  two  helpers  are  found  working  for  union  men  in 
direct  opposition  to  our  local  constitution,  that  prohibits  this  same;  and, 
judging  from  appearances,  it  is  safe  to  predict  that  time  will  come  in  the 
near  future  when  it  will  be  possible  to  manufacture  fine  coats  on  a  large 
scale  and  still  give  satisfaction  to  the  trade  in  regard  to  superior  work- 
manship, just  as  much  as  when  you  today  give  the  making  of  a  dress  coat 
into  the  hands  of  a  journeyman  tailor  and  rely  on  his  individual  accom- 
plishments as  an  artist  in  finishing  the  garment. 

*i  The  Tattor,  September,  1891,  p.  1,  col.  2.  Article  on  ' '  The  eight 
hour  question  as  applied  to  tailoring,"  by  Alex  S.  Drummond. 

*2  Th€  Tailor,  May,  1892,  p.  3,  col.  1,  article  by  P.  Ewald  Jensen. 


76  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [504 

These  extracts,  selected  at  about  the  date  when  agitation  by 
the  officials  of  the  national  union  on  the  helper  question  was  be- 
coming active,43  tell  their  own  stoiy  with  reference  to  the  condi- 
tions which  it  was  hoped  to  remedy.  The  regulations  by  which 
this  object  was  to  be  accomplished  have  already  been  discussed. 
The  backward  movement,  by  which  the  attempt  to  limit  helpers 
by  regulations  on  the  part  of  the  national  union  was  abandoned, 
was  due  to  reasons  which  again  may  best  be  indicated  by  the 
union  writers  themselves.  As  early  as  1889  Secretary  Lennon 
recognized  the  difficulty  of  enforcing  any  limitation  of  helpers 
in  what  was  known  as  the  cheap  custom  trade.4*  When,  how- 
ever, the  Garment  Workers'  Union  was  organized,  and  this  union 
began  to  organize  cheap  custom  tailoring,  as  well  as  the  ready- 
made  clothing  trade,  Mr.  Lennon  appears  to  have  resumed  the 
effort  for  limitation  of  helpers  in  his  own  union  by  national  reg- 
ulation, believing  no  doubt  that  it  could  be  done  in  the  better 
class  of  trade,  to  which,  more  and  more,  the  Journeymen  Tailors ' 
Union  was  confining  itself.45 

It  will  be  recalled  that  the  one  helper  limit  by  enactment  of 
the  national  union  was  in  force  without  qualification  from  1898 
to  1903.  The  following  letter,  which  was  addressed  to  the  com- 
mittee on  laws  and  audit  in  1903  by  Organizer  Carlquist,  appears 
to  have  had  an  influence  in  the  direction  of  relaxing  the  one 
helper  rule:46 

Owing  to  certain  peculiar  features  which  I  have  encountered  in  connec- 
tion with  our  craft  in  the  cities  of  New  England  which  I  have  visited, 
notably  so  Boston  and  Providence,  I  take  liberty  of  calling  your  attention 
particularly  to  the  feature  of  helpers.  My  experience  in  the  city  of  Boston 

«  Cf.  supra,  pp.  69-70. 

44 '  '  My  attention  has  been  most  forcibly  called  to  the  fact  of  the  con- 
stantly increasing  amount  of  cheap  custom  tailoring  that  is  being  done  in 
every  city  of  the  country,  and  to  the  very  alarming  fact  in  connection 
therewith,  that  such  work  is  not  being  made  by  our  members,  but  by  per- 
sons who  are  usually  not  tailors  at  all.  .  .  .  While  in  the  fine  stores  of 
the  country  it  is  entirely  practical  to  limit  our  members  to  one  helper,  or 
even  none  at  all,  in  the  making  of  this  cheap  custom  work  it  appears  to  me 
that  such  limitation  is  suicidal  to  the  journeyman  tailor,  and  deprives  him 
of  work  that  should  be  made  by  him,  but  is  now  made  by  persons  who  have 
really  no  skill  as  tailors."  The  Tailor,  September,  1889,  p.  1,  col.  4. 

45  The  question   of  trade  union   jurisdiction  over  different  branches   of 
the  clothing  trade  will  be  discussed  more  fully  in  Ch.  III. 

46  The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  8. 


505]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  77 

teaches,  yes,  convinces  me,  that  in  order  to  more  thoroughly  organize  our 
craft  in  places  where  the  jours  employ  more  than  one  helper  it  will  be 
necessary  to  take  in  such  jours  as  well  as  their  helpers.  .  .  .  The  ques- 
tion of  more  than  one  helper  exists  in  many  places  to  a  greater  or  less 
extent.  The  question  then  arises:  Is  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  strong  and  influen- 
tial enough  to  do  away  with  this  system  of  more  than  one  helper?  We 
must  confess  our  weakness  that  we  cannot.  That  system  exists  and  is 
going  to  exist  whether  we  as  an  organization  refuse  to  take  such  people  into 
our  union  or  not.  Certain  it  is,  however,  that  were  the  laws  on  that  subject 
amended  so  that  we  could  admit  them  to  membership,  I  am  positive  that 
that  evil,  as  we  jours  look  upon  it,  could  be  better  regulated.  .  .  .  For  us 
to  frown  upon  that  portion  of  the  jour  tailors  who  employ  more  than  one 
helper  is  not  going  to  remedy  the  evil,  neither  will  it  do  us  any  good  to  call 
them  "sweaters."  They  will  keep  on  "sweating"  in  spite  of  us,  and  so 
long  as  they  are  outside  of  our  organization  they  are  a  worse  menace  to  us 
than  if  we  had  them  in  our  organization. 

The  committee  approved  in  essence  the  ideas  set  forth  in  the 
above  letter,*7  and  proposed  the  amendment  already  noted, 
whereby  the  one  helper  rule  might  be  suspended  at  the  discre- 
tion of  the  General  Executive  Board.48  The  further  relaxation 
of  the  one  helper  rule  and  its  final  elimination  appear  to  have 
been  dictated  by  similar  considerations.49 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  removal  of  restrictions  on 
the  part  of  the  national  union  put  a  stop  to  the  regulation  of 
helpers  and  apprentices  by  the  local  unions.  An  inquiry  in 
1911  indicated  that  of  sixty-seven  unions  reporting:  "Six  un- 
ions stated  that  no  helpers  were  employed  by  their  members; 
twenty-five  unions  had  no  rule  on  the  subject ;  ten  unions  had  a 
rule  that  no  helpers  should  be  employed;  twenty-three  unions 
permitted  one  helper  only  to  each  journeyman ;  two  unions  per- 
mitted not  more  than  two  helpers  to  each  journeyman;  one 
union  permitted  'one  helper  to  each  shop.'  " 50 

(4)  To  oblige  helpers  and  apprentices  to  assume  union  obli- 
gations, since  indirectly  they  profit  by  union  conditions. 

(5)  To  educate  helpers  and  apprentices  in  union  principles, 
and  prevent  their  acting  against  the  union  in  strikes. 

These  two  purposes  gave  the  principal  motives  for  admitting 
helpers  and  apprentices  to  membership,  and  later  insisting  upon 

47  The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  16,  col.  2. 

48  Supra,  p.  70. 

49  Tli-e  Tailor,  September,  1909,  p.  1,  comment  on  Proposition  No.  3. 
so  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  p.  158. 


78  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [506 

their  admission,  under  the  rules  already  indicated.51  The  plac- 
ing of  the  age  limit  at  eighteen  years  appears  to  have  been  based 
upon  three  ideas:  (1)  that  the  helper  who  has  reached  this  age 
is  sufficiently  mature  to  undertake  union  responsibilities;  (2) 
that  women  helpers  of  this  age  have  reached  their  legal  major- 
ity; (3)  that  by  this  age  apprentices  should  have  learned  the  ele- 
ments of  the  trade,  and  both  for  their  own  benefit  and  for  the 
protection  of  the  union  should  be  under  union  control. 

The  regulations  concerning  the  local  dues  and  privileges  of 
apprentices  and  helpers 52  are  passed  over  as  comparatively  in- 
significant in  the  policy  of  the  national  union. 


It  is  difficult  to  ascertain  the  facts  with  reference  to  the  pres- 
ent supply  of  tailors.  It  seems  to  be  admitted  both  by  employ- 
ers and  employees  that  there  is  a  real  scarcity  of  skilled  journey- 
men capable  of  doing  the  highest  grade  of  work.  From  the  liter- 
ature of  employers  it  would  be  inferred  that  there  is  a  scarcity 
of  tailors  in  general,  while  in  the  literature  of  the  Tailors'  Union 
frequent  reference  is  made  to  a  condition  where  there  are  ' '  two 
tailors  for  every  job."  The  confusion  on  this  subject  arises 
no  doubt  in  part  from  the  different  viewpoints  of  the  several 
observers,  some  having  an  eye  to  the  fact  that  in  the  rush  sea- 
sons it  would  frequently  be  convenient  for  the  boss  to  have  a 
larger  force  of  journeymen,  while  others  are  thinking  of  the 
condition  in  the  slack  seasons,  when  there  are  not  only  two,  but 
several,  journeymen  to  each  job.  A  reasonable  conclusion,  in 
view  of  all  the  information  in  the  writer's  possession,  appears  to 
be  that  there  is  an  actual  scarcity  of  skilled  tailors  of  the  highest 
competency  and  skill,  although  there  are  a  considerable  number 
of  mediocre  workers  parading  as  tailors,  including  many  who 
have  learned  the  trade  somewhat  imperfectly  abroad.  Accepting 
this  conclusion,  we  proceed  to  consider  the  causes  of  the  scarcity 
of  skilled  workers. 

Here  again  we  find  differences  of  opinion  and  a  considerable 
variety  of  alleged  causes  advanced.  In  "A  Series  of  Papers  on 

si  Cf.  supra,  pp.  66-68. 
52  Cf.  supra,  p.  72. 


507]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  79 

the  Journeyman  Tailor  Problem,"  published  by  The  American 
Gentleman,  a  fashion  journal,53  the  following  causes  are  alleged 
as  contributing  to  the  scarcity  of  skilled  journeymen  tailors: 

The  best  journeymen  leave  the  trade  to  become  cutters  or 
merchant  tailors,  or  to  accept  good  positions  with  ready-made 
clothing  factories. 

The  system  of  specialized  or  "sectional"  work  on  the  cheaper 
class  of  tailoring  does  not  require  highly  skilled  workers. 

Immigrant  tailors  now  come  from  less  competent  and  intelli- 
gent races  than  formerly. 

The  tailoring  trade  is  not  recognized  as  an  art,  as  it  should  be, 
and  therefore  is  not  attractive  to  possible  learners. 

The  old  apprenticeship  system  has  disappeared,  largely  on 
account  of  the  invention  of  the  sewing  machine. 

The  tailoring  trade  has  a  bad  reputation  abroad,  especially  in 
the  British  Isles ;  the  trade  is  taught  mainly  in  charitable  insti- 
tutions, and  is  considered  to  be  "  no  good  except  for  cripples  and 
women. ' ' 

The  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America  has  placed  obsta- 
cles in  the  way  of  learners  acquiring  the  tailoring  trade. 

Journeymen  tailors  employed  on  piece  work  have  not  time  to 
teach  apprentices. 

Apprentices  rise  from  the  position  of  helpers,  and  are  im- 
perfectly trained ;  journeymen  do  not  teach  them  the  whole  trade 
for  fear  of  losing  a  good  helper. 

There  is  no  chance  for  a  boy  to  learn  the  tailoring  trade  in 
school  vacations;  journeymen  will  not  take  boys  for  three  months 
only. 

Apprentices  are  taught  mainly  by  journeymen  employed  in 
the  cheaper  trade ;  journeymen  in  the  fine  trade  will  not  take  the 
trouble  to  instruct  apprentices;  apprentices  instructed  in  the 
cheaper  trade  cannot  fill  positions  in  first-class  shops. 

The  merchant  tailor  who  does  not  have  his  work  made  in  his 
own  shop  has  nobody  with  whom  to  place  apprentices. 

53  This  series  consists  of  twelve  articles  reprinted  from  the  November 
and  December,  1910,  and  February,  1911,  numbers  of  the  journal.  These 
articles  were  brought  out  by  a  prize  essay  contest.  The  articles  are  not 
signed,  but  from  their  tenor  it  is  evident  that  the  writers  included  journey- 
men tailors  as  well  as  employers  and  cutters. 


80  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [508 

Young  men  are  prejudiced  against  the  tailoring  trade,  as  com- 
pared with  other  trades,  on  account  of: 

(a)  Long  hours  and  irregular  seasons; 

(b)  The  long  period  of  apprenticeship  (two  to  five  years) ; 
(e)     The  low  wages  of  apprentices; 

(d)  The  low  wages  of  journeymen; 

(e)  Lack  of  clean  and  sanitary  shops; 

(f)  Failure  of  employers  to  furnish  shops  at  all  in  some  localities, 
necessitating  home  work  or  payment  of  shop  rent; 

(g)  Employment  of  women;  boys  do  not  want  to  take  up  "women's 
work ; ' ' 

(h)     Disadvantages  of  the  piecework  system; 

(i)      Second-class  workers  can  make  as  much  as  first-class  workers  by 
taking  less  pains  and  working  faster. 

The  remedies  suggested  in  the  same  series  of  papers  are  equally 
diverse : 

Establish  the  sectional  system  of  production.  Let  several 
merchant  tailors  unite  to  furnish  a  large  workshop. 

Establish  trade  schools,  either  under  public  or  private  control. 
Publish  text-books  on  the  tailoring  trade. 

Admit  apprentices  to  instruction  in  first-class  shops  at  fair 
wages. 

Employ  journeymen  by  the  week. 

Employ  journeymen  by  the  year,  like  a  cutter;  regularize 
hours. 

Furnish  free  shops  for  the  journeymen.  Improve  sanitation 
and  other  conditions  in  all  shops. 

Gave  good  workmen  recognition  for  their  skill ;  pay  fair  wages. 

Improve  the  personal  treatment  of  journeymen  by  employers 
and  cutters;  do  not  ask  journeymen  to  make  alterations  without 
extra  pay  on  account  of  cutters'  mistakes. 

Let  cutters'  associations  and  journeymen  tailors'  unions  hold 
joint  meetings  and  discuss  the  improvement  of  the  trade. 

If  skilled  journeymen  cannot  be  obtained,  employ  women  to 
do  all  of  the  work  except  the  heavy  pressing. 

As  would  be  expected,  the  journeymen  tailors  allege  in  expla- 
nation of  the  scarcity  of  apprentices  those  causes  connected  with 
unfavorable  conditions  in  the  trade,  and  are  inclined  to  favor 
those  remedies  which  have  to  do  with  the  improvement  of  condi- 
tions. The  employers,  while  by  no  means  indifferent  to  the 
necessity  for  improved  conditions,  still  adhere  to  the  theory  that 
apprenticeship  is  being  restricted  by  the  rules  of  the  tailors '  un- 


509]  HELPERS  AND  APPRENTICES  81 

ions  and  by  the  tacit  disinclination  of  journeymen  to  teach  ap- 
prentices. The  favorite  remedy  of  employers  for  the  situation  is 
the  establishment  of  trade  schools.  The  journeymen  deny  stren- 
uously that  apprenticeship  is  being  held  back  by  the  rules  of  their 
unions,  and  point  out  that  for  reasons  altogether  independent  of 
their  rules  the  number  of  apprentices  is  seldom  up  to  the  number 
allowed  by  the  unions.  On  the  subject  of  the  education  of  appren- 
tices, Secretary  Lennon  was  accustomed  to  make  a  distinction 
between  "trade  schools"  and  "industrial  education."  Com- 
menting upon  a  plan  for  the  establishment  of  trade  schools  by 
an  association  of  merchant  tailors  he  said  :54 

We  feel  sure  that  the  merchant  tailors  must  understand  the  distinction 
between  industrial  education  and  trade  schools.  Industrial  education  means 
the  development  of  high  class  workmen.  Trade  schools  mean,  and  have 
never  meant  anything  else,  the  turning  out  of  a  lot  of  cheap  skates  indus- 
trially that  could  accomplish  nothing  as  workmen  and  were  only  a  menace 
to  the  business.  In  Munich  where  industrial  education  has  reached  its 
highest  development  and  its  greatest  degree  of  efficiency,  the  trade  schools 
-  if  they  may  be  called  that  at  all  -  are  merely  an  adjunct  to  the  general 
education  of  the  workman  or  apprentice.  Trade  schools  in  the  tailoring 
business  have  already  been  tried  in  this  country.  And  in  every  case 
they  have  been  failures  absolutely  and  totally;  didn't  turn  out  mechanics, 
and  in  the  next  place,  they  couldn  't  get  material  in  the  shape  of  boys  from 
which  to  make  mechanics,  or  girls  either.  And  they  can't  obtain  them  now, 
and  these  merchant  tailors,  if  they  had  studied  industrial  conditions  even 
superficially,  must  know  that  this  statement  is  absolutely  true.  Conditions 
in  our  trade  are  the  thing  that  prevents  the  boys  and  girls  from  entering  it. 
And  until  those  conditions  are  changed  there  will  be  no  influx  of  boys  and 
girls  into  the  custom  tailoring  industry. 

We  may  conclude  that  for  a  time  the  tailoring  trade  will  be 
obliged  to  rely  very  largely  upon  the  immigration  of  foreign- 
trained  tailors  for  its  supply  of  workmen,  but  that  eventually  a 
system  of  vocational  education  will  be  perfected  which  will  cre- 
ate real  mechanics.  In  the  meanwhile,  the  number  of  skilled 
tailors  of  the  old  type  required  will  become  less  and  less,  as  the 
new  systems  of  subdividing  the  work  increase,  and  it  is  probable 
that  in  the  long  run  the  employment  of  skilled  hand-workers, 
capable  of  making  an  entire  garment,  will  cease,  except  in  the 
very  finest  stores. 

5*  The  Tattor,  January,  1910,  p.  20.  For  other  articles  on  the  question 
of  apprenticeship,  see  The  Tailor,  April,  1910,  pp.  4,  16;  May,  1910,  p.  17; 
January  23,  1917,  p.  3. 


CHAPTER  III 

PROBLEMS  OP  JURISDICTION  AND  THE  MOVEMENT 
TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM 

In  a  previous  monograph 1  an  account  was  given  of  the  rise  of 
the  tailoring  trade  in  America,  and  a  brief  resume  of  this  account 
is  necessary  at  this  point.  For  the  first  two  centuries  follow- 
ing colonization,  the  tailoring  industry  in  this  country  was  occu- 
pied chiefly  with  custom  work  for  wealthy  patrons,  together  with 
a  small  amount  of  ready-made  clothing,  hand-sewed,  for  Indians, 
negroes  and  sailors.  The  invention  of  the  sewing  machine  in 
1846  marked  a  great  change.  Following  this  date  the  ready- 
made  clothing  industry  increased  rapidly,  and  soon  became  a 
formidable  competitor  to  the  older  system  of  custom  work,  or 
work  made  to  the  order  and  measure  of  each  individual  customer. 
To  meet  this  competition  merchants  and  employees  in  the  custom 
trade  were  obliged  to  cheapen  production  by  having  a  part  of 
the  work  on  custom  suits  done  by  machine.  As  a  result  the 
machines  were  introduced  into  shops  and  homes,  and  the  skilled 
tailors  began  to  employ  more  extensively  members  of  their  own 
families  or  outside  helpers,  usually  women,  to  do  the  finishing 
work. 

The  past  thirty  years  has  witnessed  a  very  great  improvement 
in  the  quality  of  ready-made  clothing,  and  the  old-style  merchant 
tailoring  business  has  suffered  a  corresponding  decline.  This 
result  has  been  accelerated  by  the  rise  of  new  systems  of  produc- 
tion, whereby  the  methods  of  the  ready-made  clothing  industry 
have  been  applied  to  the  manufacture  of  clothing  to  measure. 
Custom  tailoring  done  in  factories  is  generally  known  as  ' '  special 
order"  trade,  and  has  entered  into  competition  principally  with 

i  Stowell,  Studies  in  Trade  Unionism  in  tlie  Custom  Tailoring  Trade,  pp. 
16-32;  42-75. 

82 


511]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  83 

the  cheaper  grade  of  custom  tailoring  done  on  the  old  system.2 
However,  in  recent  years  new  methods  have  grown  up  for  mak- 
ing also  the  finer  grades  of  clothing,  on  what  is  known  as  a  "  sec- 
tional" or  "team"  system,  whereby  the  work  on  a  garment  will 
be  systematized  and  passed  through  several  hands,  employing 
only  as  much  skilled  help  as  is  absolutely  necessary.3  The  result 
is  that  we  have  today  a  very  great  variety  in  the  methods  and 
quality  of  custom  tailoring,  ranging  from  the  cheapest  machine 
work  to  the  most  artistic  and  expensive  suit  turned  out  by  the 
fine  stores  in  the  cities. 

The  early  societies  mentioned  in  the  historical  sketch  in  the 
Introduction  were  composed  of  custom  tailors,  hand  workers, 
together  with  their  apprentices  and  helpers.  The  jurisdictional 
questions  which  are  to  engage  our  attention  in  this  chapter  had 
not  yet  arisen.  "While  the  ready-made  clothing  industry  existed 
during  the  period  from  1725  *  to  1880,  movements  toward  the 
organization  of  the  workers  in  this  industry  were  insignificant, 
and  there  was  little  opportunity  for  clash  of  jurisdiction  with 
the  custom  branch.  In  fact,  it  was  not  until  the  period  of  or- 
ganization of  national  unions  that  the  jurisdiction  question  be- 
came prominent. 

In  1883,  when  the  present  national  union  of  journeymen  tai- 
lors was  founded,  the  workers  on  ready-made  clothing  were  known 
as  "shop  tailors."  At  this  time  there  was  no  national  union 
composed  exclusively  of  shop  tailors,  although  some  local  soci- 
eties were  forming.  There  was  a  national  organization  known 
as  the  ' '  Tailors '  Progressive  Union  of  America, ' ' 5  which  con- 
tained both  custom  tailors  and  shop  tailors,  the  shop  tailors, 
however,  being  in  the  majority.  The  Knights  of  Labor  also  con- 
tained some  assemblies  of  tailors,  including  both  custom  tailors 
and  shop  tailors.6  Finally,  one  or  two  unions  of  shop  tailors 
became  affiliated  with  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  organization.  It 

2  Even  cheap  custom  tailoring  done  by  the  piece  on  a  sub-contracting 
or  ' '  sweating ' '  system  has  found  it  difficult  to  compete  with  the  factory 
work. 

3  Cf.  supra,  p.  51. 

4  Miss  Sumner  sets  1725  as  the  date  of  the  beginning  of  the  ready-made 
clothing  industry  in  America.     Stowell,  op.  cit.,  p.  20,  and  note  36. 

s  Cf.  Stowell,  op.  cit.,  p.  66,  and  note  112. 
e  Ibid.,  pp.  67-68,  and  note  115. 


84  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [512 

should  be  understood  that  at  this  time  (1883-1891)  the  shop  tai- 
loring or  ready-made  clothing  industry  was  not  sharply  separated 
from  the  custom  tailoring  industry,  either  with  reference  to  the 
places  of  business  or  with  reference  to  the  people  who  carried 
on  these  industries.  It  was  a  fact  deplored  by  Secretary  Lennon 
of  the  custom  tailors  that  the  members  of  his  craft  were  contrib- 
uting to  the  'destruction  of  their  own  occupation  by  working  on 
ready-made  clothing  in  the  dull  seasons.7  Mr.  Lennon  as  editor 
of  the  custom  tailors'  journal  expressed  himself  repeatedly  in 
favor  of  a  single  organization  to  include  both  custom  tailors  and 
shop  tailors.8  The  official  organ  of  the  Progressive  Union  was 
also  in  favor  of  a  single  organization,  which  would  involve  an 
amalgamation  of  the  Progressive  Union  with  the  Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union.9  The  arguments  advanced  in  favor  of  amalga- 
mation were  as  follows:  (1)  Organizations  should  concentrate 
power  as  much  as  possible,  instead  of  wasting  it  fighting  each 
other;  (2)  amalgamation  would  have  an  "animating  effect"  up- 
on the  individual  tailors  and  local  unions  that  had  not  yet  joined 
the  nationals;  "the  usual  excuse,  that  they  do  not  know  what 
organization  to  join,  would  be  impossible;"  (3)  the  consolidated 
organization  would  have  sufficient  power  to  bring  in  those  as- 
semblies affiliated  with  the  Knights  of  Labor;  (4)  the  bosses 
would  respect  the  united  union  more  than  the  divided  ones;  (5) 
the  expense  of  administration  would  be  less;  (6)  the  influence  of 
the  union  label  could  be  extended.10 

In  favor  of  the  general  proposition  to  bring  shop  tailors  into 

7  "  I  am  well  aware  of  the  fact  that  there  are  now  in  New  York  City 
several  large  ready-made  firms  who  pride  themselves  on  the  fine  quality  of 
their  work;  who  hold  back  for  the  dull  season  with  the  custom  tailors  very 
much  of  their  best  trade,  knowing  full  well  that  they  can  get  plenty  of  good 
tailors  to  make  it.    To  the  credit  of  many  custom  tailors  it  can  be  said  that 
they  have  at  all  times  and  under  all  circumstances  refused  to  be  the  tools 
to  cut  their  own  throats,  and  what  a  pity  that  it  could  not  be  said  of  all." 
The  Tailor,  September,  1889,  p.  7. 

8  Editorials  in  The  Tailor,  January,  1888,  p.  4 ;  May,  1888,  p.  7 ;  June, 
1888,  p.  4;  December,  1888,  p.  5,  on  "Unity  Among  the  Tailors." 

»  The  Tailor,  December,  1888,  p.  5,  article  ' '  Regarding  the  Amalgamation 
of  the  Tailors'  Unions,"  reprinted  from  Progress,  official  organ  of  the 
Tailors'  Progressive  Union  of  America. 

10  The  Progressive  Union  had  adopted  a  label,  which  was  recognized  by 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  in  1887  for  use  on  ready-made  clothing, 
but  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  did  not  adopt  a  label  until  about  1891. 


513]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  85 

the  custom  tailors'  union,  it  was  pointed  out  that  shop  tailors 
were  doing  the  work  of  custom  tailors  during  strikes,  and  that  it 
would  be  necessary  to  secure  control  over  the  shop  tailors  before 
anything  could  be  accomplished  in  the  industry  at  large.11 

There  were  some  obstacles  in  the  way  of  amalgamating  the 
Progressive  Union  and  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union,  as  a 
majority  of  the  "Progressives"  were  outspoken  Socialists,  while 
the  majority  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors  were  more  conservative 
along  political  lines.  The  "Progressives"  claimed  that  the 
skilled  journeymen  tailors  were  opposed  to  progressive  ideas  on 
account  of  their  better  economic  situation,  but  expressed  the 
hope  that  "even  these  will  awaken  from  their  sleep."12 

11  An  excellent  description  of  the  situation  in  the  clothing  trade  is  afforded 
by  the  following  passage,  describing  the  experience  of  a  committee  of  the 
custom  tailors'   union   in  attempting  to  prevent  a  reduction  of  wages  in 
first-class  houses: 

' '  The  main  argument  of  the  bosses  was  that  the  second-class  houses 
were  of  too  great  a  competition  to  them,  as  they  sold  the  same  goods  at 
lower  prices.  We  were  asked  to  either  accept  the  reduction  or  to  charge 
the  second-class  houses  higher  rates.  We  parted,  giving  the  assurance  to 
try  to  enforce  the  latter  proposition.  The  second-class  houses  acknowledged 
selling  goods  of  equal  quality  as  did  the  first-class  houses,  but  stated  fur- 
ther that,  if  they  had  to  pay  the  same  prices,  their  customers  would  patron- 
ize third-class  houses  and  consequently  neither  they  themselves  nor  we  would 
draw  any  benefit  from  such  action.  We  were  determined  to  fulfill  our  mis- 
sion, and,  in  order  to  place  the  lever  on  the  right  spot,  we  called  on  the 
third-class  houses.  They  also  saw  the  disagreeableness  of  the  present  state 
of  affairs,  but  could  under  no  consideration  pay  any  higher  prices,  for,  the 
gentlemen  explained,  if  we  have  to  pay  more,  we  will  also  have  to  charge 
more,  and  the  effect  will  be  that  our  customers  -  to  a  great  extent  laborers  - 
will  buy  ready-made  goods.  The  extremely  low  prices  for  ready-made 
clothing  forces  upon  them  a  competition  which  they  can  meet  only  with  the 
greatest  carefulness,  or  else  they  will  have  to  close  up  shop.  ...  It 
must  be  accredited  to  our  stupidness  that  we  are,  by  a  raise  of  wages,  about 
to  saw  off  the  branch  upon  which  we  are  sitting,  for  we  are  driving  off  our 
customers  to  a  sphere  where  we  can  exert  no  influence  nor  have  any  control 
over  them  .  .  .  what  we  can  and  must  do  is  to  bring  all  the  workers  of 
our  trade  under  our  control.  This  is  the  point  where  the  lever  must  be  ap- 
plied if  we  expect  to  see  any  results  at  all;  every  other  exertion  is  more  or 
less  of  a  subordinate  nature. ' '  From  ' '  Eef orm  Measures  —  III, "  by  an 
unknown  writer  signed  ' '  F.F. ' ' ;  possibly  the  secretary  of  the  Syracuse,  N. 
Y.,  union,  who  had  the  same  initials.  The  Tailor,  June,  1889,  p.  1. 

12  The   Tailor,  December,   1888,  p.   5,  article  from  Progress.     Cf.  note 
9,  p.  84. 


86  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [514 

Desultory  efforts  to  bring  all  of  the  tailors  into  one  organiza- 
tion continued  during  the  years  from  1888  to  1891.  In  1891  a 
conference  of  shop  tailors  met  in  New  York  City,  and  expressed 
a  desire  to  join  the  Journeymen  Tailors '  Union.  When,  however, 
this  action  was  presented  to  the  Executive  Board  of  the  Jour- 
neymen Tailors,  they  refused  to  admit  the  shop  tailors  or  ready- 
made  clothing  workers,  the  principal  reasons  apparently  being 
a  feeling  of  trade  caste  and  a  fear  that  in  some  way  the  decline 
of  merchant  tailoring  would  be  hastened  if  the  skilled  workers 
allowed  the  cheaper  workers  to  join  their  union.13  As  a  result, 
in  1891,  the  ready-made  clothing  workers  started  a  union  of 
their  own,  under  the  name  of  ' '  The  United  Garment  Workers  of 
America, ' '  and  received  a  charter  from  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor.1*  Later,  in  1900,  the  workers  on  ready-made  clothing 
for  women  organized  a  separate  national  union,  known  as  the 
"International  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union."  At  this 
stage,  therefore,  there  were  three  organizations  in  the  tailoring 
industry  which  were  recognized  by  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor:  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America,  controlling 
custom  work ;  the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America,  control- 
ling principally  work  on  men's  ready-made  clothing;  and  the 
International  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union,  controlling  work 
on  women's  ready-made  clothing. 

The  first  clash  of  jurisdiction  between  the  Journeymen  Tai- 
lors' Union  and  the  United  Garment  Workers  grew  out  of  the 
system,  to  which  attention  has  already  been  called,  of  manufac- 
turing custom-made  clothing  in  factories.  While  the  greatest 
development  of  this  system  has  been  comparatively  recent,  it  was 
beginning  to  command  attention  early  in  the  history  of  the 
present  national  union.15  In  1896  an  issue  was  raised  between 

is  It  has  been  necessary  to  rely  upon  former  Secretary  Lennon  for  the 
details  of  this  conference,  as  it  was  not  reported  in  the  minutes  of  the  Exec- 
utive Board. 

i*  The  Tailors '  Progressive  Union  does  not  appear  to  have  been  important 
after  1889.  Cf.  Stowell,  op.  tit.,  p.  66,  note  112. 

is  "  Industrial  changes  are  gradually  coming  into  our  trade;  division  and 
subdivision  of  labor  is  steadily  advancing  in  the  making  of  clothes;  the 
tailors  must  take  advantage  of  the  new  conditions  for  their  own  benefit,  or 
the  new  methods  will  leave  them  in  the  rear  idly  waiting,  while  people  who 
are  not  tailors  will,  under  the  new  system,  make  the  trade.  We  must  reason 


515]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  87 

the  two  national  unions  concerned  by  an  attempt  on  the  part  of 
a  firm  named  the  M.  M.  Jacobs  Company  of  Chicago  to  use  the 
Garment  Workers'  label  on  work  made  to  measure  under  a  fac- 
tory system.16  There  appeared  to  be  a  lack  of  agreement  among 
the  custom  tailors  themselves  as  to  which  union  should  control 
this  class  of  firms.  As  early  as  1892  Secretary  Lennon  of  the 
Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  had  expressed  himself  favorable  to 
organizing  the  factory  work  or  ' '  cheap  trade, "  as  it  was  called,17 
and  a  little  later  had  indicated  his  belief  that  the  first-class  mer- 
chant tailors  and  their  employees  were  making  a  mistake  by 
opposing  the  organization  of  the  cheaper  firms.18  The  contro- 
versy over  the  Jacobs  firm  in  1896  made  it  evident  that  some 
kind  of  an  agreement  would  have  to  be  reached  between  the  Gar- 
ment Workers  and  the  Tailors  with  reference  to  these  firms.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  Tailors'  delegates  to  the  1896  convention  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  were  instructed  by  their  Execu- 
tive Board  to  ask  for  the  adoption  of  the  following  resolutions : 
WHEREAS,  The  jurisdiction  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  and  the  United  Garment 
Workers  of  America  has  been,  and  is,  by  a  considerable  part  of  organized 

together  as  to  what  can,  and  what  should  be  done.  Indifference  is  suicidal. ' ' 
The  Tailor,  October,  1891,  p.  4,  editorial. 

is  This  firm  was  established  by  some  union  garment  workers  who  had  been 
blacklisted  by  the  employers  following  a  strike  in  Chicago,  and  who  had 
gone  into  business  for  themselves.  The  Tailor,  July,  1896,  p.  8. 

i?  "  The  cheap  trade  is  each  day  making  greater  inroads  into  the  fine 
merchant  tailoring,  and  for  that  reason  the  tailors  employed  in  the  cheap 
trade  must  be  organized  and  lifted  up,  or  they  will  surely  pull  down  the 
fine  tailors."  The  Tailor,  February,  1892,  editorial. 

is  "  In  several  cities  our  unions  are  having  some  difficulty  in  handling 
the  very  cheap  trades,  as  many  of  our  members  and  many  merchant  tailors 
of  the  first  class  object  to  the  cheap  trades  being  recognized  as  tailoring  at 
all.  We  believe  this  view  to  be  wrong.  They  are  in  the  trade,  and  in  to 
stay,  and  will  do  less  harm  organized  than  unorganized."  The  Tailor,  Jan- 
uary, 1893,  p.  4. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Garment  Workers'  journal  was  opposed 
to  the  new  systems  of  tailoring,  claiming  that  the  "special  order"  work 
was  ' '  a  shrewd  dodge  for  the  purpose  of  deceiving  the  customer  into  the  be- 
lief that  he  is  obtaining  custom  work  at  ready-made  prices."  See  article, 
"Cheap  Custom  Work  a  Deception,"  The  Tailor,  November,  1895,  p.  6, 
reprinted  from  The  Garment  Worker.  To  understand  this  attitude  of  the 
Garment  Workers  it  is  necessary  to  recall  that  the  cheap  custom  trade  was 
taking  away  patronage  from  the  ready-made  clothing  houses,  as  well  as 
from  the  fine  merchant  tailors. 


88  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [516 

labor  misunderstood,  and  in  consequence  thereof  misunderstandings  have 
occurred,  and  charters  have  been  granted  by  one  of  the  above  unions  to 
workers  who  were  really  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  other  one,  therefore 

Resolved,  By  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  in  convention  assembled, 
that  we  hereby  recognize  as  the  sole  and  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  the  J.  T. 
U.  of  A.  all  custom  tailors  in  the  employ  of  merchant  tailors  in  the  United 
States  and  Canada,  and  the  label  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  shall  be  the  only 
label  recognized  as  guaranteeing  custom  tailoring  to  be  union  made;  and 
further 

Resolved,  That  we  recognize  the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America  as 
having  sole  and  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  all  workers  in  the  manufacture 
of  all  clothing  other  than  custom-made,  as  defined  by  these  resolutions,  and 
the  label  of  the  U.  G.  W.  of  A.  shall  be  the  only  label  recognized  as  guar- 
anteeing such  clothing  to  be  union  made. 

Resolved,  That  the  designation  (merchant  tailors)  in  these  resolutions 
shall  be  construed  to  mean  all  establishments  where  custom  tailoring  is  made 
to  the  measure  and  to  the  order  of  each  individual  customer. 

These  resolutions  were  adopted  by  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor,  and  became  the  basis  of  demarcation  between  the  Jour- 
neymen Tailors'  Union  and  the  United  Garment  Workers.19 
Shortly  afterward  the  Tailors  issued  a  manifesto  in  their  official 
journal,  advising  the  local  unions  to  insist  strictly  upon  their 
right  to  organize  all  work  made  to  measure,  and  to  report  prompt- 
ly all  infringements.20 

In  order  to  bring  their  constitution  into  accord  with  the  action 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  the  Tailors,  through  their 
committee  on  laws  and  audit,  which  met  in  August,  1897,  sub- 
mitted to  their  membership  an  amendment  which  would  admit 
to  membership  workers  on  cheap  custom  tailoring.21  This  amend- 

i»  The  Tailor,  December,  1896,  p.  7,  Proceedings  of  the  General  Executive 
Board;  January,  1897,  p.  8. 

20  The  Tailor,  June,  1897,  p.  8. 

21  The  Tailor,  August,  1897,  p.  16,  Proposition  1.     Prior  to  1897  there 
was  no  provision  in  the  constitution  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  for 
the  admission  to  membership  of  any  but  journeymen  tailors,  their  appren- 
tices and  helpers.  The  1884,  1885,  and  1887  constitution  contained  no  ex- 
press provision  regarding  jurisdiction  or  eligibility  of  members,  except  such 
as  might  be  implied  from  the  title,  "Journeymen  Tailors'  Union."    Express 
provisions  confining  eligibility  to  journeymen  tailors,  apprentices  and  help- 
ers are  found  in  the  following  constitutions  and   sections:     1889,  Art.  VI, 
Sec.  1;  1892,  Sec.  21;  1894,  Sec.  26;  1895,  Sec.  25;  1896,  Sec.  25.    The  term 
"journeyman   tailor,"    as   used   in   these   constitutions,   applied   to   skilled 
workers  employed  by  regular  merchant  tailors  doing  a  local  business,  and 


517]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  89 

ment  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  2,133  to  233,22  and  was  embodied 
in  the  constitution  in  a  section  reading  as  follows  :23 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  shall  be  the  United  States  and 
Canada,  covering  all  tailors,  helpers,  apprentices  and  workers  engaged  in 
the  production  of  custom  made  clothing  (custom  made  clothing  to  be  in- 
terpreted as  all  clothing  made  to  the  order  and  measure  of  each  individual 
customer). 

Although  the  amendment  had  been  passed  by  a  large  majority, 
evidently  its  significance  had  not  been  fully  realized  by  all  of  the 
members,  for  as  soon  as  an  effort  was  made  to  put  it  into  effect, 
and  certain  "special  order"  firms,  such  as  the  Globe  Tailoring 
Company,  Nicoll  the  Tailor,  and  J.  W.  Losse  2*  made  application 
to  have  their  establishments  organized  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.,  protests  arose  from  members  in  several  locali- 
ties.25 These  members  feared  that  if  firms  of  this  type,  located 
principally  in  the  larger  cities,  were  allowed  to  use  the  Journey- 
men Tailors'  label,  their  agents  would  soon  overrun  the  smaller 
towns  where  the  journeymen  tailors  were  employed,  advertising 
their  cheap  goods  as  union-made,  and  injuring  seriously  the  local 
trade.  On  the  other  hand,  the  supporters  of  the  amendment,  in- 
cluding the  general  secretary  and  the  General  Executive  Board, 
argued  that  if  the  special  order  workers  were  not  organized  by 
the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union,  they  would  be  organized  by  the 

did  not  apply  to  tailors  employed  by  factories  doing  a  ' '  special  order ' '  or 
agency  business,  even  though  to  the  order  and  measure  of  customers. 

22  The  Tailor,  November,  1897,  p.  8,  vote  on  Proposition  No.  1. 

23  Constitution,  1898,  Sec.  2. 

24  The  firm  of  J.  W.  Losse  in  St.  Louis  did  a  large  agency  business  in 
the  western  states.    In  1892  it  was  running  under  a  team  system,  each  team 
being  in  charge  of  a  contractor.     The  local  union  of  journeymen  tailors  in 
St.   Louis  induced   the   proprietor   to   abolish   the   contract   system   and   to 
establish  a  union  shop,  in  order  to  obtain  the  use  of  the  union  label.    Later, 
apparently,  the  same  firm  fell  out  of  the  good  graces  of  the  union,  for  a 
boycott  against  it  is  advertised  in  several  issues  of  the  Tailors'  journal  in 
1895  and  1896.    See  November,  1895,  p.  9;  December,  1895,  p.  8;  February, 
1896,  p.  9. 

25  See,  for  example,  letter  of  F.  Gessinger  from  Delano,  Texas,  in  Tlie 
Tailor,  September,  1901,  pp.  6-7.     This  member  complains  that  the  state  of 
Texas  is  full  of  agents  ' '  who  know  absolutely  nothing  about  tailoring  but 
being  slick  talkers,  they  make  many  people  believe  that  a  tailor  who  charges 
them  $30  or  $35  for  a  suit  is  robbing  them  and  that  they  can  furnish  as 
good  a  one  for  $15,  etc." 


90  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [518 

Garment  "Workers,  and  in  this  case  the  Tailors'  Union  would 
have  no  control  over  the  conditions  under  which  the  cheaper  gar- 
ments were  produced,  and  therefore  no  opportunity  to  reduce 
the  effects  of  their  competition.  However,  as  the  matter  appeared 
to  be  causing  a  real  controversy  among  the  members,  it  was  de- 
cided by  the  General  Executive  Board  to  resubmit  the  matter  to 
a  general  vote.  It  was  found  that  in  addition  to  the  constitu- 
tional section  governing  jurisdiction,  there  was  another  section 
vitally  concerned  with  the  matter  at  issue,  which  read  as  follows : 
Sec.  169.  (1898)  The  label  shall  not  be  used  in  the  United  States  on 
any  overcoat  sold  below  $22,  or  suit  below  $22,  or  trousers  below  $5;  or  in 
Canada  on  overcoats  sold  below  $15,  suits  below  $15,  or  trousers  below  $3.50, 
or  where  the  scale  of  prices  for  making  is  per  hour  in  the  United  States 
below  20  cents,  or  in  Canada  below  15  cents. 

In  order  to  make  it  possible,  in  case  the  admission  of  special  order 
workers  should  be  approved,  to  use  the  Tailors'  label  on  their 
work,  regardless  of  the  price  at  which  the  garments  were  sold, 
but  at  the  same  time  to  encourage  a  good  scale  of  wages  and  the 
furnishing  of  suitable  shops  by  the  employers,  the  Executive 
Board  recommended  the  following  as  a  substitute  for  the  section 
quoted  above: 

The  label  shall  not  be  used  in  the  United  States  on  garments  made  for 
any  firm  where  the  scale  of  prices  averages  below  twenty  cents  per  hour,  or 
in  Canada  where  the  scale  paid  averages  below  fifteen  cents  per  hour.  Nor 
shall  the  label  be  placed  on  any  garment  made  outside  of  back-shops  fur- 
nished free  by  the  employers. 

A  vote  was  therefore  called  for  (1)  upon  the  question  of  or- 
ganizing the  workers  on  cheap  custom  trade;  (2)  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  adopting  the  new  Sec.  169  as  proposed  by  the  Board.26 
The  result  of  the  vote  was  as  follows  :27 

In  favor  of  organizing  cheap  custom  trade 905 

Against    organizing    cheap    custom   trade 1,695 

In  favor  of  new   Sec.   169 1,104 

Against  new   Sec.   169 1,454 

Both  propositions,  therefore,  were  defeated. 

Referring  to  the  first  proposition,  as  the  most  important,  we 
find  that  an  intelligent  analysis  of  the  vote  is  somewhat  difficult, 

26  The  Tailor,  January,  1899,  p.  9,  Proceedings  of  the  General  Executive 
Board;  February,  1899,  p.  8,  editorial;  February,  1899,  pp.  12-13,  official 
notice  calling  for  vote. 

27  The  Tailor,  March,  1899,  p.  13. 


519]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  91 

as  the  vote  did  not  appear  to  follow  consistently  any  territorial 
lines  nor  any  distinction  between  large  and  small  cities.  It  is 
true  that  the  large  cities  (over  100,000  population)  gave  a  much 
smaller  majority  against  the  proposition  than  the  smaller  cities, 
but  if  the  vote  of  Chicago,  which  was  almost  unanimous  in  favor 
of  the  proposition,28  is  eliminated,  the  large  cities  show  a  strong 
majority  against  the  proposition.29  It  seems  certain  that  the 
feeling  of  protest  which  we  have  described  especially  with  refer- 
ence to  the  smaller  cities  was  not  by  any  means  confined  to  these 
cities,  but  was  more  or  less  general,  involving  not  only  a  fear  of 
the  competition  of  the  cheaper  trade,  but  also  a  distinct  preju- 
dice against  it  on  account  of  trade  caste.  This  prejudice,  which 
was  first  noted  in  connection  with  the  efforts  of  the  shop  tailors 
to  secure  entrance  to  the  custom  tailors'  union,30  appears  to  have 
operated  all  through  the  history  of  the  votes  on  the  jurisdictional 
question. 

Commenting  on  the  vote,  the  general  secretary  wrote  :31 
We  are  now  in  a  position  where  we  can  withdraw  all  claims  to  jurisdic- 
tion over  this  class  of  trade,  and  either  the  Garment  Workers  can  take  up 
their  organization,  or  as  there  are  not  less  than  50,000  of  such  workers  in 

28  In  explanation  of  the  strong  vote  of  the  Chicago  union  (379  to  1)  in 
favor  of  the  proposition,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  Chicago  union  has 
usually  been  a  strong  supporter  of  the  ideas  represented  by  the  Lennon 
administration.  This  union  is  one  of  the  older  unions  and  has  been  dis- 
posed toward  a  well-disciplined  and  conservative  line  of  action. 

2»  Twenty-seven  cities  of  more  than  100,000  population,  including  Chicago, 
gave  the  following  vote:  Yes,  635;  No,  708.  The  same  cities,  except 
Chicago,  gave  Yes,  256 ;  No,  707.  The  cities  of  less  than'  100,000  population 
gave  Yes,  270;  No,  987.  About  25  unions  in  all  failed  to  vote.  Each  of 
the  following  large  cities  gave  a  majority  in  favor  of  organizing  the  cheap 
custom  tailoring  firms:  New  York,  Chicago,  St.  Louis,  Syracuse,  Atlanta, 
Winnipeg,  St.  Paul,  Minneapolis,  Toledo;  total,  9  cities.  Each  of  the  follow- 
ing large  cities  gave  a  majority  against  organizing  these  firms:  Denver, 
New  Haven,  Indianapolis,  Louisville,  New  Orleans,  Boston,  Grand  Rapids, 
Kansas  City,  Omaha,  Cincinnati,  Columbus,  Philadelphia,  Pittsburgh,  Mem- 
phis, Nashville,  Milwaukee,  Spokane;  total,  17  cities.  The  following  large 
cities  failed  to  vote:  Birmingham,  Los  Angeles,  Worcester,  Oakland,  San 
Francisco,  Washington,  Baltimore,  Fall  River,  Detroit,  Newark  (N.  J.), 
Albany,  Rochester,  Cleveland,  Portland  (Oregon),  Scranton,  Richmond, 
Toronto;  total,  17  cities. 

so  Cf.  vupra,  p.  86. 

si  Tlie  Tailor,  March,  1899,  p.  8. 


92  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [520 

the  United  States,  they  can  start  an  international  organization  for  them- 
selves.    What  will  be  the  outcome,  no  man  can  say. 

In  the  course  of  the  next  two  years  a  number  of  special  order 
firms  and  firms  making  custom  tailoring  under  a  factory  or 
team  system  were  organized  by  the  Garment  Workers,  and  cer- 
tain other  employees  of  the  same  class  of  firms  formed  a  union  of 
their  own,  known  as  the  "Custom  Clothing  Makers'  Union." 
That  all  of  the  tailors'  unions  were  not  satisfied  with  this  result 
is  evident  from  the  report  of  the  general  secretary  to  the  com- 
mittee on  laws  and  audit  which  met  in  August,  1901.  In  this 
report  he  said  :32 

We  now  have  our  unions  vigorously  protesting  against  the  organization 
of  this  class  of  trade  either  by  the  independent  union  or  by  the  Garment 
Workers;  and  we  have  the  vote  of  our  general  membership  saying:  "We 
cannot  admit  them  into  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A."  This  policy  we  cannot  longer 
pursue  and  maintain  the  respect  and  support  of  organized  labor  in  the 
United  States  and  Canada,  nor  can  we  pursue  such  a  policy  and  maintain 
our  own  self-respect. 

The  committee  decided  that  the  question  had  become  again  of 
sufficient  importance  to  require  a  vote,  and  gave  it  a  leading 
place  among  the  propositions  which  they  submitted  to  the  mem- 
bership in  1901.33  As  in  1899,  the  vote  was  adverse  to  admitting 
the  workers  on  cheap  custom  trade,  the  result  being  1,212  in 
favor  and  3,511  against.34  The  causes  for  the  negative  vote  were 
no  doubt  similar  to  those  which  operated  in  1899. 

The  question  of  the  proper  affiliation  of  the  new  Custom  Cloth- 
ing Makers'  Union  was  introduced  into  the  1901  convention  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  through  the  application  of 
this  union  for  a  charter.  The  convention  did  not  decide  the 
matter  at  once,  but  left  it  open  for  discussion  by  representatives 
of  the  various  organizations  concerned.  As  one  of  these  repre- 
sentatives, Secretary  Lennon  asked  for  advice  from  the  local 
unions  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.35  Sixty-one  unions  responded  to 
this  request.  Eight  locals  favored  the  admission  of  the  Custom 
Clothing  Makers  to  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  without  condition.  Four- 
teen locals  favored  their  being  an  auxiliary  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A. 

32  The  Tailor,  August,  1901,  p.  5. 

sa  Eeport  of  committee  on  laws  and  audit,  The  Tailor,  August,  1901,  p. 
13;  same  issue,  p.  14,  Proposition  No.  1. 

a*  The  Tailor,  November,  1901,  supplement,  vote  on  Proposition  No.  1. 
35  The  Tailor,  January,  1902,  editorial,  p.  14. 


521]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  93 

with  separate  name  and  label.  Twelve  locals  believed  that  they 
should  become  a  part  of  the  Garment  Workers'  organization. 
Finally,  twenty-nine  locals  advised  that  they  should  be  allowed 
to  maintain  a  separate  and  distinct  union,  with  such  a  title  and 
label  as  would  least  conflict  with  those  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A. 
After  some  conferences  a  charter  was  granted  by  the  Executive 
Council  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  to  the  workers  on 
cheap  custom  trade,  under  the  name  of  "The  Special  Order 
Clothing  Makers '  Union, ' ' 3e  but  this  charter  was  ultimately  re- 
voked by  the  full  convention  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.,  and  jurisdiction 
over  the  special  order  tailors  was  conceded  to  the  Garment  Work- 
ers.37 

It  might  have  been  supposed  that  the  question  would  now  re- 
main at  rest,  but  in  February,  1903,  we  find  it  arising  again  in 
the  form  of  a  resolution  by  the  Executive  Board  of  the  Tailors : 
That,  in  view  of  the  continued  agitation  among  our  members  regarding  the 
admission  to  membership  of  the  Special  Order  Tailors,  some  unions  being 
desirous  of  taking  them  in  and  some  strongly  opposed,  the  G.  E.  B.  hereby 
requests  every  local  union  to  send  to  the  General  Secretary  on  or  before 
April  1,  1903,  a  statement  regarding  the  wish  of  their  members  as  to 
whether  the  G.  E.  B.  shall  again  submit  to  a  general  vote  the  question  of 
the  admission  to  membership  in  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  of  the  Special  Order 
Tailors.ss 

This  resolution  was  embodied  in  an  official  circular  sent  out  to 
all  local  unions,  calling  for  a  vote  on  the  question  as  to  whether 
a  referendum  on  the  question  of  the  special  order  tailors  should 
be  taken,  and  containing  further  a  proposed  plan  for  constituting 
a  Special  Order  Branch  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.,  in  case  the  vote 
should  be  taken  and  should  prove  favorable  to  the  admission  of 
the  special  order  tailors.39  The  returns  showed  103  local  unions 
in  favor  of  a  general  vote,  and  109  unions  opposed.40  However, 
the  board  decided  to  submit  the  question,  inasmuch  as  the  propo- 
sition to  take  a  vote  had  been  initiated  by  a  local  union  in  Chi- 
cago, and  had  been  seconded  by  more  than  one-fourth  of  all  the 

36  Proceedings  of  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  April  15,  1902.     In  American  Federationist,  v.  9,  p.  333. 

37  Proceedings,  A.  F.  of  L.,  November,  1902,  pp.  206-207. 
ss  The  Tailor,  February,  1903,  p.  16. 

3»  For  official  circular  and  details  of  proposed  plan,  see  The  Tailor, 
March,  1903,  p.  23. 

*o  The  Tailor,  April,  1903,  p.  20,  Proceedings  General  Executive  Board. 


94  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [522 

locals.41  The  question  was  submitted  in  the  following  form: 
' '  Shall  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  claim  jurisdiction  over  all  persons  en- 
gaged in  the  manufacture  of  custom  tailoring,  including  what  is 
known  as  the  Special  Order  Tailors?"42  The  proposition  was 
again  defeated,  but  by  a  close  vote.43  Commenting  on  the  vote  in 
his  report  to  the  1903  committee  on  laws  and  audit,  the  general 
secretary  said:4* 

Our  members  have  by  their  votes  said  practically  that  these  people  be- 
long to  the  Garment  Workers  and  this  fact  in  view  of  all  the  circumstances 
surrounding  the  case  must  be  considered  absolute  and  final;  the  question 
never  to  be  reopened  in  the  future.  I  believe  we  should  claim,  and  I  am 
confident  the  Garment  Workers  will  have  no  objection,  jurisdiction  over  all 
regular  merchant  tailoring  establishments  and  the  people  making  their 
work.  .  .  .  What  I  mean  by  a  legitimate  merchant  tailor  is  one  that 
does  in  the  main  a  local  merchant  tailoring  business. 

In  the  same  report  the  general  secretary  recommended  that  an 
agreement  be  reached  with  the  Garment  Workers'  Union  with 
reference  to  the  precise  line  of  demarcation  between  that  union 
and  the  tailors,  and  this  recommendation  was  concurred  in  by  the 
committee. 

The  1903  committee  made  one  or  two  slight  changes  in  the 
jurisdiction  clause,  by  which  workers  on  custom  tailoring  on 
ladies'  dresses  and  suits,  and  also  bushelmen  employed  in  mer- 
chant tailoring  and  retail  ready-made  clothing  establishments, 
would  be  expressly  eligible  to  membership.45  These  changes  were 
approved  by  a  general  vote.48 

In  accord  with  the  recommendation  of  the  committee  on  laws 
and  audit,  the  Executive  Board  at  its  meeting  of  September  7, 
1903,  appointed  a  committee  of  three  to  meet  with  a  like  com- 
mittee of  the  Garment  Workers'  Union  "to  see  if  the  lines  of 
jurisdiction  cannot  be  clearly  set  forth,  or  some  kind  of  an  alli- 
ance between  the  organizations  effected  that  will  be  to  the  benefit 
of  both. ' ' 47  These  committees  met,  and  as  the  result  of  their 

41  Constitution,  1902,  Sec.     105;  The  Tailor,  May,  1903,  editorial,  p.  14. 

42  Official  circular,  The  Tailor,  May,  1903,  p.  18. 

43  3,657  to  3,422.     The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  pp.  22-24. 

44  The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  5. 

45  The  Tailor,  August,  1903,  p.  25,  Proposition  No.  1. 

46  The  Tailor,  November,  1903,  supplement,  vote  on  Proposition  No.  1. 

47  Proceedings  of  the  General  Executive  Board,  The  Tailor,  September, 
1903,  p.  16. 


523]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  95 

deliberations,  an  agreement  was  drawn  up,  dated  October  19, 
1903,  the  essential  feature  of  which  was  that  custom  tailoring 
establishments  selling  suits  at  $25  or  more  in  the  United  States, 
or  $18  or  more  in  Canada,  should  come  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.,  whether  the  "old-line"  journeymen  system  or 
the  factory  system  was  employed;  but  that  establishments  em- 
ploying the  factory  system,  and  selling  suits  at  a  price  lower 
than  set  forth  above,  should  come  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
United  Garment  Workers  of  America.  There  were,  in  addition, 
some  minor  clauses  which  provided  for  the  furtherance  of  com- 
mon interests  on  the  part  of  the  two  unions.48 

The  agreement  of  1903  was  not  found  to  be  very  satisfactory, 
mainly  for  the  reason  that  where  the  prejudice  on  the  part  of  the 
custom  tailors  against  organizing  the  cheap  trade  still  prevailed, 
they  would  not  organize  even  that  portion  of  it  which  the  agree- 
ment placed  under  their  jurisdiction,  and  the  consequence  was 
that  the  officers  of  the  Tailors  had  no  recourse  except  to  relin- 
quish the  trade  in  such  places  to  the  Garment  Workers.  In  New 
York  City,  for  example,  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  has  never 
maintained  any  jurisdiction  over  anything  but  regular  merchant 
tailoring  stores,  and  the  special  order  trade,  as  far  as  it  has  been 
organized  at  all,  has  been  organized  by  one  or  another  of  the 
Garment  Workers'  organizations. 

The  1905  convention  of  the  Tailors  passed  a  resolution,  which 
was  approved  by  the  membership,  to  the  effect  that  the  1903 
agreement,  while  it  was  the  best  to  be  had  at  the  time,  was  no 
longer  adequate,  and  that  further  negotiations  with  the  Garment 
Workers  should  be  entered  into.49  As  a  result,  a  plan  of  amalga- 
mation was  drawn  up  by  a  joint  committee  of  the  two  organiza- 
tions, but  was  defeated  by  both  organizations  on  a  referendum 
vote.  Under  the  proposed  plan  the  amalgamated  organization 
would  have  been  known  as  "The  Garment  Workers'  and  Tailors' 
International  Union. ' '  It  would  have  consisted  of  four  branches : 
(1)  custom  tailors,  (2)  cutters,  (3)  workers  on  ready-made 
clothing,  (4)  workers  on  overalls,  shirts,  etc.  The  plan  appar- 
ently did  not  command  adequate  attention  in  either  organization, 
but  as  far  as  it  was  given  consideration,  the  defeat  seems  to  have 

48  For  the  agreement  in  full,  see  The  Tailor,  November,  1903,  p.  9. 
4»  The  Tailor,  March,  1905,  p.  5,  Proposition  No.  37. 


96  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [524 

been  due  to  criticism  of  details  rather  than  of  the  general  ideas.50 
The  vote  of  the  Tailors'  Union  on  the  plan  was  4,083  to  2,382 
against  the  proposition.  The  vote  of  the  Garment  Workers  was 
3,206  to  2,989  against  it.51 

When  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  met  in  convention  in 
Buffalo  in  1909,  the  question  of  the  cheap  trade  was  presented  in 
a  very  acute  form.  Since  the  previous  convention,  in  1905,  the 
making  of  custom  work  in  factories  or  on  a  team  system  had 
made  greater  progress  than  ever  before.52  The  effect  upon  the 
Tailors'  Union,  which,  as  we  have  seen,  had  repeatedly  refused 
to  organize  workers  on  the  new  systems,  was  very  apparent,  there 
being  not  only  no  increase,  but  an  appreciable  decline  in  member- 
ship in  the  four  years;  while  in  a  number  of  smaller  cities  the 
old-line  merchant  tailoring  was  nearly  destroyed.53  Awakening 

so  Proposed  plan,  The  Tailor,  October,  1905,  pp.  1-4;  vote,  February,  1906, 
p.  20;  editorial  comment  on  vote,  February,  1906,  p.  14.  Some  comments 
on  the  plan  from  the  Garment  Workers'  standpoint  are  found  in  the  Weekly 
Bulletin  of  the  Clothing  Trades,  November  3,  1905,  p.  3,  article  by  S.  L. 
Landers,  and  p.  4,  article  on  ' '  Problems  of  Amalgamation, ' '  reprinted  from 
Syracuse  Industrial  Weekly. 

si  Correspondence  with  Garment  Workers'  headquarters. 

52  See  editorials  in  The  Tailor,  especially  March,  1908 ;   August,  1908 ; 
February,  1909;  June,  1909;  September,  1908. 

53  No  accurate  figures  are  available  for  the  total  membership  in  benefit 
at  any  given  date,  but  from  1890  to  1912  the  figures  are  available  for  the 
paid-up  membership  at  the  end  of  each  month,  these  figures  having  been 
ascertained  by  actual  count  from  the  registers  at  headquarters,  and  pub- 
lished in  the  1913  report  of  Secretary  Brais.     The  paid-up  membership  at 
any  given  date  is  less  than  the  membership  in  benefit,  since  members  are 
allowed  to  become  three  months  and  seven  days  in  arrears  before  they  are 
suspended.     However,  for  comparative  purposes  the  figures  in  Mr.   Brais' 
report  are  the  best  hitherto  published.     His  report  shows  that  on  July  1, 
1905,  the  paid-up  membership  was  12,500;   and  on  July  1,  1909,  11,822; 
indicating  a  decline  in  the  four  years  of  678.    There  seem  to  have  been  two 
principal  reasons  for  this  decline:      (1)   the  financial  depression  of  1907; 
(2)  the  rise  of  cheap  custom  tailoring  firms.     The  influence  of  the  panic  is 
clearly  seen  by  comparing  the  maximum  membership  during  the  fo^r  years 
(12,888  on  July  1,  1907)   with  the  minimum  membership  during  the  same 
period  (11,379  on  October  1,  1908).     In  this  period  of  fifteen  months  there 
was  a  decline  of  1,509  in  the  paid-up  membership,  or  more  than  twice  the  net 
decline  for  the  four  years.     Nevertheless,  the  rise  of  the  new  systems  of 
tailoring,  if  not  equally  obvious,  was  certainly  another  cause  of  the  decline 
in  membership.      There  are   a   number   of   small   cities,    particularly   those 
within  range  of  the  St.  Louis  and  Indianapolis  special  order  firms,  in  which 


525]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  97 

to  these  facts,  to  which  attention  was  forcibly  called  in  the  sec- 
retary's report,54  the  convention  adopted  a  resolution  that  the 
Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America  should  claim  jurisdiction 
' '  over  all  workers  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  legitimate  cus- 
tom tailoring,  no  matter  what  system  of  work  is  used. " 55  In 
the  same  resolution,  delegates  of  the  Tailors '  Union  to  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  of  Labor  were  directed  to  present  the  above  claim 
to  the  convention  of  that  body ;  a  federation  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A., 
the  Garment  Workers  and  kindred  organizations  was  favored; 
and  the  substitution  of  time  or  weekly  wages  for  the  piece  system 
was  recommended.  The  resolution  was  approved  by  a  referen- 
dum vote  of  the  members,58  and  became  a  part  of  the  law  of  the 
organization  January  1,  1910.57 

To  understand  fully  the  meaning  and  limitations  of  the  new 
claim  as  to  jurisdiction,  it  is  necessary  to  recall  that  the  old- 
style  merchant  tailoring  was  being  undermined  in  two  ways:  (1) 
by  mail  order  or  "special  order"  firms  located  principally  in 
large  cities,  and  manufacturing  garments  to  measure  on  a  fac- 
tory system;  (2)  by  firms  doing  a  local  custom  tailoring  business 
on  a  factory  or  team  system,  this  class  including  for  the  most 
part  firms  which  formerly  had  operated  on  the  old  plan,  but 
which  had  changed  their  system  so  as  to  subdivide  the  labor  in  a 
different  fashion  and  to  pay  everybody  by  the  week.  There  is  a 
difference  of  opinion  among  prominent  members  who  were  in 
attendance  at  the  Buffalo  convention  as  to  whether  the  delegates 
who  voted  for  the  resolution  intended  to  claim  jurisdiction  over 
both  classes  of  firms,  or  simply  over  the  second  class.  It  is  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  Lennon,  who  was  general  secretary  of  the  union 
at  the  time  of  the  convention,  that 58 

the  intention  of  the  Buffalo  convention  was  to  include  under  our  jurisdiction 
all  custom  tailoring,  no  matter  under  what  system  of  work  it  is  made;  not 
only  such  houses  as  Bell's  in  New  York,  but  all  the  firms  between  his  and 

the  local  unions  of  tailors  have  been  completely  wiped  out.  For  Mr.  Brais' 
report,  see  The  Tailor,  August,  1913,  p.  5. 

s*  The  Tailor,  August,  1909,  p.  6,  report  on  "Membership;"  pp.  8-9, 
report  on  ' '  Our  Jurisdiction. ' ' 

ss  The  Tailor,  August,  1909,  p.  44,  Proposition  No.  40. 

56  The  Tailor,  November,  1909,  supplement,  vote  on  Proposition  No.  40. 
The  vote  was  3,971  to  1,319  in  favor  of  the  proposition. 

ST  Constitution,  1910,  Sec.  175. 

ss  Correspondence,  March  13,  1912.     Mr.  Lennon 's  personal  position  was 


98  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [526 

Scotch  Woolen  Mills,  Kahn,  etc.,  etc.;  in  fact,  all  clothing  made  to  the 
measure  of  each  individual  customer. 

On  the  ^ther  hand,  Mr.  Brais,  who  was  chairman  of  the  con- 
vention, and  who  succeeded  Mr.  Lennon  as  secretary  in  1910,  has 
given  his  opinion  that  the  immediate  supporters  of  the  resolution 
and  those  who  worked  for  its  adoption  had  the  same  view  as  that 
quoted  from  Mr.  Lennon  above,  but  that  the  delegates  in  general 
did  not  have  in  mind  the  "long-distance"  firms,  but  only  those 
doing  a  local  business.59 

a  little  less  sweeping.  In  commenting  upon  the  proposed  extension  of 
jurisdiction,  while  the  vote  was  pending,  he  said: 

' '  I  believe  that  the  legitimate  custom  tailoring,  no  matter  what  form  of 
work  is  used  to  turn  it  out,  should  be  under  our  jurisdiction.  But  I  wish 
to  emphasize  the  word  'legitimate.'  I  am  not  in  favor  of  organizing 
everything  that  somebody  calls  custom  tailoring  and  thereby  absolutely 
wipe  out  of  existence  the  possibility  of  protecting  the  interest  of  the  old 
line  journeyman  tailor  who  is  still  employed  single-handed  or  with  one 
helper. ' '  The  Tailor,  September,  1909,  p.  3,  comment  on  Proposition  No.  40. 

And  in  his  letter  accepting  the  nomination  for  secretary  in  1909,  Mr. 
Lennon  said  further,  referring  to  factory  and  team  work  (particularly  in 
the  second  class  of  houses  noted  above) : 

"I  believe  that  the  aim  of  our  union  should  be  to  place  this  class  of 
work  entirely  under  a  weekly  system  where  the  employer  furnishes  the  fac- 
tory or  shop  and  hires  all  his  help,  both  men  and  women,  by  the  week  at 
proper  wage  and  reasonable  hours  of  labor.  And  that  all  contract  work 
should  be  prohibited  just  as  rapidly  as  possible,  and  all  persons  who  are 
'go-betweens'  as  between  the  proprietor  and  those  who  actually  do  the  work 
should  be  eliminated,  and  whatever  of  factory  system  we  must  have  in  the 
custom  tailoring,  that  it  shall  be  without  contractors  or  sub-contractors  of 
any  kind,  shape  or  description.  ...  I  believe  as  the  factory  system 
advances,  displacing  journeymen  tailors  that  the  shop  should  be  organized 
and  the  journeymen  tailors  given  the  work  and  not  somebody  else.  .  .  . 
As  to  the  organization  of  shops  that  are  making  their  work  under  a  factory 
system  in  any  particular  locality,  I  believe  that  the  local  union  in  existence, 
if  there  is  one,  should  be  primarily  the  judges  as  to  whether  such  shop  shall 
or  shall  not  be  organized,  and  that  the  organization  shall  be  governed  ac- 
cordingly." The  Tailor,  October,  1909,  p.  4. 

59  "The  convention,  being  composed  of  journeymen  tailors  who  were 
working  under  the  old  system  of  production,  had  in  mind  stores  that  they 
were  working  in,  but  who  in  time  would  adopt  the  new  system  of  production 
or  team  system.  It  is  my  opinion  that  the  delegates  had  no  intention  of 
organizing  firms  who  do  long  distance  tailoring,  as  that  would  injure  the 
small  towns  and  locals.  But  those  of  us  who  were  back  of  this  resolution 
and  who  fought  for  its  adoption  meant  all  classes  of  tailoring  that  is  made 
to  the  individual  measure  of  the  customer. "  E.  J.  Brais,  correspondence, 
March  15,  1912. 


527]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  99 

In  accord  with  the  instructions  of  the  1909  convention,  the 
Tailors'  delegates  presented  to  the  convention  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  the  claim  for  jurisdiction  embodied  in  the 
new  resolution.  The  claim  was  referred  to  the  Executive  Coun- 
cil, with  instructions  that  the  council  bring  about  a  conference 
between  representatives  of  the  Tailors'  Union  and  of  the  Gar- 
ment Workers'  Union  for  the  purpose  of  dealing  with  the  mat- 
ter at  issue.60  However,  no  record  of  any  such  conference  is 
found  prior  to  the  1910  convention  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor.  At  this  convention  the  delegates  representing  the 
Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America,  the  United  Garment 
Workers  of  America,  and  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union, 
held  a  conference,  but  were  prevented  by  lack  of  time  from  any 
exhaustive  discussion.  However,  it  was  agreed  that  in  the  case 
of  any  large  trade  movement  or  strike  by  any  of  the  organiza- 
tions, all  three  would  cooperate  as  far  as  possible  for  the  success 
of  such  movement.  It  was  further  agreed,  provided  the  execu- 
tive boards  of  the  international  unions  approved,  that  a  confer- 
ence be  held  shortly  in  New  York  City  between  representatives 
of  the  organizations  concerned  ' '  to  promote  and  work  out  if  pos- 
sible some  further  means  of  practical  cooperation,  federation  or 
amalgamation."61  In  accord  with  this  action  the  General  Ex- 
ecutive Board  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  appointed  two 
delegates  to  attend  the  conference  whenever  it  should  be  held.62 
Secretary  Brais,  one  of  the  delegates  appointed,  called  upon  the 
representatives  of  the  other  organizations  in  New  York  City  dur- 
ing the  month  of  February,  1911,  but  nothing  of  a  definite  char- 
acter was  effected.63 

In  an  article  dated  January  1,  1912,  former  Secretary  Lennon 
suggested  the  elements  of  a  plan  of  amalgamation,  under  which 
the  Garment  Workers',  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  and  Journey- 
men Tailors'  organizations  would  form  a  single  international 
union,  but  the  local  unions  of  each  branch  of  the  industry  would 

w  Proceedings,  A.  F.  of  L.  Convention,  1909,  pp.  125,  220,  291-292;  The 
Tailor,  December,  1909,  pp.  21-22,  report  of  Tailors'  delegates. 

ei  The  Tailor,  December,  1910,  p.  5,  reports  of  Tailors'  delegates  to  1910 
convention  of  American  Federation  of  Labor. 

62  The  Tailor,  December,  1910,  p.  25,  Proceedings  of  the  General  Exec- 
utive Board  for  December  4,  1910. 

es  The  Tailor,  March,  1911,  p.  23. 


100  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [528 

be  organized  separately  and  have  local  autonomy.64  This  plan 
was  never  acted  upon  officially. 

In  the  early  part  of  1912  a  tendency  could  be  noticed  on  the 
part  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors  to  take  the  fullest  possible  ad- 
vantage of  the  claim  for  extended  jurisdiction  adopted  in  1909. 
In  an  editorial  in  the  February,  1912,  Tailor,  Secretary  Brais 
said: 

We  again  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  all  locals  and  members  that  our 
jurisdiction  includes  all  custom  tailors  both  in  men's  and  ladies'  trade, 
made  under  any  system  of  production,  whether  it  be  individual  production, 
piece  work,  week  work,  sectional  or  team  work;  all  bushelmen  in  all  classes 
of  trade,  in  clothing  stores,  cleaning  and  pressing  establishments,  pressers 
and  helpers  in  any  of  the  above.  We  are  aiming  at  a  thorough  organization 
of  the  trade  in  all  of  its  branches  and  concede  jurisdiction  of  any  part  of  it 
to  no  organization.  Our  members  must  be  on  guard  and  let  no  opportunity 
slip  to  effect  organization  in  any  of  the  above  establishments. 

As  far  as  employees  of  pressing  and  cleaning  establishments 
were  concerned,  there  was  considerable  reason  for  claiming  juris- 
diction over  such  employees,  as  they  were  doing  work  of  a  kind 
done  in  all  tailor  shops,  and  in  fact  jurisdiction  over  them,  with 
the  exception  of  employees  of  pressing,  dyeing  and  cleaning 
shops  connected  with  laundries,  was  later  conceded  to  the  Tailors' 
Union  by  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor.65  In  the  matter,  however,  of  organizing  the  cheaper 
branches  of  the  custom  trade,  opposition  was  met  with  from  the 
Garment  Workers.  Efforts  by  the  Tailors  in  New  York  City  to 
secure  a  mass  meeting  of  clothing  workers  were  interfered  with 
by  the  Garment  Workers,  on  the  ground  that  the  Tailors  were 
trespassing  on  the  jurisdiction  of  the  latter.66  Similar  contro- 
versies arose  in  St.  Louis,67  Brantford,  Ont.,68  Newark,  N.  J.,69 
and  in  other  places,  the  complainants  being  now  on  one  side,  and 
now  on  the  other.  In  some  cases  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers, 

6*  The  Tailor,  January,  1912,  pp.  19-20. 

es  Abstract  of  Minutes  of  meeting  of  Executive  Council  of  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  August  12-19,  1912.  In  American  Federationist,  v. 
19,  p.  857.  In  1916  jurisdiction  over  employees  of  dyeing,  pressing  and 
cleaning  establishments  connected  with  laundries  was  granted  to  the  Laundry 
Workers'  International  Union.  Proceedings,  A.  F.  of  L.,  1916,  p.  123. 

66  The  Tailor,  January,  1912,  p.  25,  report  of  Organizer  Emanuel  Jacobs. 

67  The  Tailor,  March,  1912,  pp.  22-23,  report  of  Organizer  F.  Petera. 

es  The  Tailor,  March  1912,  pp.  28-29,  report  of  Organizer  Hugh  Eobinson. 
«»  The  Tailor,  April,  1912,  p.  26,  report  of  Organizer  Thomas  Sweeney. 


529]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  101 

as  well  as  the  workers  on  men's  clothing,  were  involved.  The 
objections  of  the  United  Garment  Workers  to  the  Tailors'  policy 
appeared  strongly  in  an  article  70  in  the  Weekly  Bulletin,  the 
organ  of  the  Garment  Workers,  in  which  the  agreement  of  1903 
between  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  and  the  United  Garment  Workers  was 
cited,  and  it  was  alleged  that  this  agreement  had  not  been  lived 
up  to  by  the  tailors.  Evidently  some  of  these  controversies  were 
appealed  to  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  for  in  the  report 
of  the  meeting  of  the  Executive  Council  for  May  9-17,  1912,71 
appears  the  following : 

On  the  controversy  between  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America 
and  the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America  in  regard  to  the  charge  of 
transgression  of  the  Garment  Workers  on  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Tailors,  it 
was  directed  that  a  conference  of  both  organizations  be  called  to  meet  at 
Washington  with  President  Gompers,  if  the  latter  is  in  the  city  at  the  time; 
if  not,  that  Secretary  Morrison  meet  with  them. 

In  accord  with  the  directions  of  the  Executive  Council,  a  con- 
ference was  held  in  Washington,  September  30,  1912,  between 
three  representatives  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union,  two 
representatives  of  the  United  Garment  Workers,  and  three  rep- 
resentatives of  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers.  In  his  report 
upon  this  conference,  Secretary  Brais  of  the  Tailors  said : 72 

Many  things  relative  to  an  amalgamation  were  discussed.  It  seemed, 
however,  that  the  time  for  an  amalgamation  has  not  arrived,  as  each  inter- 
national union  has  many  problems  confronting  them  which  will  take  some 
time  to  solve.  The  forms  of  organization  are  not  similar,  the  systems  of 
dues  and  benefits  are  different,  and  the  belief  that  exists  in  the  minds  of 
some  of  the  representatives  that  an  amalgamation  could  not  work  success- 
fully, were  handicaps  that  could  not  be  overcome. 

However,  it  was  adopted  as  the  sense  of  the  conference  that 
amalgamation  of  the  three  organizations  into  one  should  finally 
take  place ;  that  as  soon  as  practicable  the  headquarters  of  the 
three  organizations  should  be  in  one  city,  and  that  there  should 
be  selected  by  each  of  the  organizations  at  interest  a  committee 
of  three,  these  committees  to  hold  frequent  conferences  and  en- 
deavor to  work  out  a  practical  plan  of  amalgamation. 

Little  appears  to  have  resulted  from  the  plan  adopted  by  this 

™  Reprinted  in  The  Tailor,  March,  1912,  pp.  17-18. 

71  American   Federationist,   v.    19,    p.    570;    Proceedings,   A.   F.   of  L., 
1912,  Report  of  Executive  Council,  pp.  118-119. 

72  The  Tailor,  October,  1912,  pp.  15-16,  general  secretary's  report. 


102  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [530 

conference.  The  Garment  Workers  were  shortly  occupied  with 
a  great  strike  in  New  York  City,  which  was  not  settled  until 
February,  1912,  and  this  probably  accounts  to  a  considerable 
extent  for  the  neglect  of  the  amalgamation  proposition.  In  fact 
it  was  not  until  the  1913  convention  of  the  Tailors'  Union  that 
the  question  again  became  prominent. 

During  the  four  years  between  the  1909  and  1913  conventions 
it  had  become  increasingly  evident  that  a  single  organization  in 
the  tailoring  industry  would  be  an  advantage  to  the  workers. 
The  cheaper  systems  continued  to  encroach  upon  the  old-line 
work;  numerous  custom  merchants  changed  or  tried  to  change 
their  shops  to  a  factory  system ;  strikes  on  the  part  of  workmen 
to  prevent  this  change  as  a  rule  were  failures,  and  strikes  for 
other  purposes  were  handicapped  by  the  fact  that  workers  nor- 
mally engaged  on  cheap  custom  tailoring  could  be  secured  to  take 
the  places  of  the  strikers,  or,  what  amounted  to  the  same  thing, 
the  local  merchant  involved  in  a  strike  could  send  his  work  away 
to  other  cities,  where  it  would  be  made  by  the  cheap  workers.  In 
view  of  these  facts,  when  the  convention  of  the  Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union  met  in  Bloomington,  111.,  August  4,  1913,  Secre- 
tary Brais  recommended  strongly  to  the  convention  a  radical 
change  of  policy.73  The  difficulty  of  organizing  cheap  workers 
under  a  system  of  dues  and  benefits  adapted  to  better  paid  work- 
ers was  pointed  out,  as  well  as  the  necessity  for  an  industrial 
union  covering  the  whole  tailoring  industry.  It  was  therefore 
recommended  by  the  secretary  that  the  Journeymen  Tailors' 
Union  of  America  should  change  its  name  to  read,  ' '  Tailors '  In- 
dustrial Union ; ' '  should  lower  the  dues ;  should  abolish  ultimate- 
ly the  sick  and  death  benefit,  and  reduce  the  strike  benefit ;  and 
should  claim  jurisdiction  over  all  workers  in  the  tailoring  in- 
dustry, not  only  those  engaged  in  the  custom  branch  (regular 
custom  tailors,  factory,  special  order  and  team  workers,  bushel- 
men,  helpers  and  apprentices,  pressers,  dyers  and  cleaners),  but 
also  the  garment  workers  employed  on  ready-made  clothing.74 

73  Report  of  Secretary  Brais,  The  Tailor,  August,  1913,  pp.  2-16. 

7*  In  explanation  of  this  claim,  it  was  stated  later  by  Secretary  Brais  that 
it  was  not  the  intention  of  the  Tailors'  Union  to  assume  jurisdiction  over 
garment  workers  already  organized  by  other  unions.  The  Tailors'  Union 
claimed  only  the  right  to  take  in  unorganized  workers,  no  matter  what 
branch  of  the  industry  they  belonged  to.  ' '  The  unorganized  belong  to  any 


531]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  103 

This  proposition  was  well  received  by  the  convention,  especially 
by  the  Socialist  wing,  which  is  well  known  to  be  in  favor  of  in- 
dustrial unionism  as  opposed  to  craft  unionism.  Opposition  de- 
veloped from  a  few  delegates,  who  maintained  that  the  proposed 
action,  in  trespassing  upon  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  Gar- 
ment Workers  and  of  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers,  was  in  vio- 
lation of  the  constitution  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
with  which  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America  was 
affiliated.  These  delegates  favored  the  end  in  view,  namely,  the 
unification  or  alliance  of  all  trade  union  interests  in  the  cloth- 
jng  trades,  but  preferred  to  respect  the  authority  of  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor  while  endeavoring  to  secure  an  ad- 
justment of  the  whole  matter.  In  spite  of  this  protest  the 
resolution  to  claim  full  jurisdiction  in  the  tailoring  industry 
was  carried  by  a  vote  of  111  to  9.  The  convention  voted 
also  to  change  the  name  of  the  organization  to  " Tailors'  In- 
dustrial Union,  International,"  and  passed  a  resolution  favor- 
able to  forming  one  union  in  the  tailoring  industry.  When 
it  came  to  the  question  of  reducing  benefits,  the  convention 
refused  to  make  any  change  in  the  sick  benefit,  but  a  virtual 
reduction  of  the  death  benefit  was  recommended  in  a  propo- 
sition to  extend  the  term  of  continuous  membership  required 
to  secure  the  maximum  benefit  of  $100  from  four  to  ten  years, 
with  corresponding  changes  in  the  terms  of  membership  re- 
quired to  secure  the  smaller  amounts.  It  was  also  voted  to 
reduce  the  strike  benefit  to  $5  a  week.75  On  the  question  of 
dues,  the  only  concession  that  could  be  secured  from  the  conven- 
tion was  to  reduce  the  dues  of  helpers  earning  less  than  $12  a 
week  to  40  cents  a  month,  provided  they  would  not  claim  sick  or 

organization  that  can  get  them,  and  we  hardly  believe  that  any  fair  minded 
man  will  deny  us  the  right  to  organize  in  this  unorganized  field. ' '  Editorial 
by  E.  J.  Brais,  The  Tailor,  May,  1914,  p.  2. 

75  Under  the  existing  constitution  the  strike  benefit  was  six  dollars  a 
week,  where  the  strike  or  lockout  lasted  less  than  six  weeks,  and  nine  dol- 
lars a  week  after  a  strike  or  lockout  had  been  on  more  than  six  weeks. 
Constitution,  1910,  Sec.  59.  The  new  proposition  was  to  establish  a  uni- 
form benefit  of  five  dollars  per  week,  regardless  of  the  duration  of  the 
strike.  It  was  felt  that  the  old  rule  would  be  too  great  a  strain  upon  the 
treasury  of  the  union,  particularly  if  the  extension  of  jurisdiction  should 
bring  in  a  considerable  number  of  new  members  in  need  of  help  to  raise 
their  wages. 


104  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [532 

death  benefits ;  otherwise  they  should  pay  full  dues ;  i.  e.,  65  cents 
a  month  to  the  national  union,  and  local  dues  as  required  by  the 
local  union.76 

When  the  action  of  the  convention  was  submitted  to  a  refer- 
endum vote,  all  of  the  recommendations  noted  above  were  car- 
ried, except  the  proposition  to  modify  the  death  benefit.  As  a 
net  result,  therefore,  the  jurisdiction  was  extended,  the  name 
changed,  the  strike  benefit  reduced  to  $5  a  week,  and  the  dues 
of  helpers  decreased.77 

The  new  claims  of  the  Tailors'  Union  with  reference  to  juris- 
diction aroused  immediate  indignation  in  the  ranks  of  the  Gar* 
ment  Workers,  especially  when  the  Tailors  began  carrying  out 
their  policy  in  earnest  and  began  to  organize  employees  claimed 
by  the  Garment  Workers'  organization.  The  result  was  that  a 
protest  was  filed  with  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  by  the 
United  Garment  Workers  of  America.  As  is  customary  in  such 
cases,  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor  directed  first  that  the  Tailors'  Union  and  the  Garment 
Workers'  Union  should  hold  a  conference  and  endeavor  to  ad- 
just their  differences  themselves.78  On  December  19,  1913,  the 
Executive  Board  of  the  Tailors'  Union  addressed  a  communica- 
tion to  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  and  as  this  letter  contains  a  statement  of  the  position  of 
the  Tailors'  Union,  it  is  considered  worth  while  to  quote  a  por- 
tion of  it : 7S) 

At  this  time  there  are  three  separate  organizations  or  international  un- 
ions operating  in  the  industry,  all  of  them  doing  their  best  individually, 
but  in  no  way  united  or  working  together.  The  action  of  our  members  may 
result  in  a  jurisdiction  controversy;  in  such  contention,  entailing  a  great 
waste  of  time,  money  and  energy  fighting  each  other;  all  of  which  should 
be  expended  for  the  purpose  of  organizing  the  industry  and  solidifying  the 
ranks  and  harmonizing  our  efforts  for  the  one  purpose,  that  of  uplifting  the 
workers. 

Gentlemen,  we  have  no  desire  to  enter  into  a  controversy  of  this  kind  and 
sincerely  hope  to  avoid  it;  and  we  presume  that  the  other  organizations  in 
question  also  dislike  a  struggle  of  this  character.  Therefore,  we  respect- 
fully request  the  assistance  and  advice  of  your  honorable  body  to  recommend 

i*  Proceedings  of  the  1913  convention,  The  Tailor,  August,  1913. 

77  See  Propositions  2,  3,  4,  20,  30,  31  and  38,  The  Tailor,  September,  1913, 
pp.  3-15;   also  vote  on  same,  The  Tailor,  November,  1913,  supplement. 

78  The  Tailor,  January,  1914,  p.  5. 

7»  The  Tailor,  January,  1914,  pp.  23-24. 


533]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  105 

a  plan  of  action  that  will  be  satisfactory  to  all  concerned;  thus  avoiding  an 
unnecessary  struggle  between  the  organizations  directly  interested. 

We  respectfully  suggest  the  following:  That  the  three  international 
unions  operating  in  the  clothing  trades,  viz.:  The  International  Ladies' 
Garment  Workers'  Union,  the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America  and  the 
Tailors'  Industrial  Union  (as  it  will  be  known  after  January  1,  1914)  be 
instructed  or  requested  to  cooperate  to  organize  the  workers  in  the  clothing 
industry,  this  being  the  main  object. 

That  either  of  the  three  International  Unions  be  recognized  as  having 
the  right  to  organize  non-union  workers  in  the  clothing  industry,  and  affil- 
iate them  with  the  Union  during  the  organizing  work,  until  such  time  as 
amalgamation  may  be  secured. 

That,  after  new  organization  has  been  effected  in  any  establishment  or 
city,  that  the  matter  of  their  affiliation  be  left  entirely  to  the  wisdom  and 
judgment  of  the  newly  organized  workers. 

That  there  be  a  general  and  free  exchange  of  cards  from  one  organization 
to  another. 

That  in  case  where  firms  desire  to  terminate  their  agreement  at  the  expira- 
tion of  same,  with  one  organization,  and  enter  into  agreement  with  another, 
the  matter  be  decided  upon  by  joint  committee  and  that  the  decision  of  the 
committee  be  binding  upon  all  parties  concerned. 

That  the  organizations  in  question  cooperate  to  every  other  extent  to 
bring  about  the  much  desired  end,  that  of  strong,  powerful  and  efficient 
organizations  in  the  clothing  trades. 

The  representatives  of  our  organization  are  ready  and  willing  at  all 
times  to  meet  representatives  of  the  other  two  organizations  with  a  view 
to  arriving  at  an  amicable  adjustment. 

On  January  19,  1914,  representatives  of  the  Tailors'  Indus- 
trial Union  and  of  the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America 
appeared  before  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  to  argue  their  respective  claims.  On  February  2, 
1914,  the  following  letter,  containing  the  decision  of  the  Execu- 
tive Council,  was  sent  to  Secretary  Brais  of  the  Tailors'  Union: 

Washington,  D.  C.,  February  2,  1914. 
Mr.  E.  J.  Brais, 

Dear  Sir  and  Brother: — 

The  Executive  Council  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  at  its  session,  January  19  to 
24,  considered  carefully  all  of  the  matter  presented,  both  orally  and  in 
writing  by  your  organization  in  support  of  its  application  for  change  of 
title  and  extension  of  jurisdiction  reached  and  the  decision  of  the  Executive 
Council  is  as  follows: 

' '  The  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  finds  such 
change  of  name  and  extension  of  jurisdiction  to  be  a  violation  of  the  law  of 
the  Federation,  Section  11  of  Article  19,  as  follows: 

"  'No  affiliated  international,  national  or  local  union  shall  be  permitted 
to  change  its  title  or  name,  if  any  trespass  is  made  thereby  on  the  juris- 


106  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [534 

diction  of  an  affiliated  organization,  without  having  first  obtained  the  con- 
sent and  approval  of  a  convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor.' 

' '  The  representatives  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors '  Union  of  America  and 
the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America  appearing  before  the  Executive 
Council  at  the  hearing,  all  contended  that  the  desire  of  both  was  for  amal- 
gamation of  the  two  unions  into  one,  and  the  Executive  Council,  therefore, 
requests  the  unions  at  interest  to  hold  a  conference  of  representatives  of 
the  two  unions  within  sixty  days,  with  the  object  in  view  of  effecting,  if 
possible,  consolidation  of  the  two  unions  into  one,  and  the  Executive  Council 
tenders  its  good  offices  to  be  helpful  in  every  way  possible  to  bring  about 
such  organization." 

You  will  please  accept  this  as  official  notification  of  the  action  of  the 
Council  in  this  matter.  I  shall  be  glad  to  have  you  advise  me  as  to  what 
steps  are  taken  by  your  organization  for  holding  the  conference  as  sug- 
gested by  the  Executive  Council.  I  should  add  that  a  letter  similar  to  this 
is  being  sent  to  the  Executive  officers  of  the  United  Garment  Workers  of 
America  and  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union.  With  best  wishes,  and 
hoping  to  hear  from  you  whenever  convenient,  I  am 

Fraternally  yours, 

SAMUEL  GOMPEBS 
President,  American  Federation  of  Labor.so 

In  order  to  understand  subsequent  developments  in  the  cloth- 
ing industry,  it  is  necessary  to  relate  these  developments  to  cer- 
tain larger  movements.81  It  is  well  known  to  students  of  the 
labor  movement  that  for  a  number  of  years  there  have  been 
fairly  well-defined  factions  among  the  members  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor.  At  one  extreme  are  the  conservatives,  who 
recognize  the  present  industrial  system  as  a  necessary  basis  for 
trade  union  policy,  and  who  adhere  to  the  craft  union  and  to  the 
present  administration  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
The  members  of  this  group  are  either  ''old  party"  adherents  or 
else  vote  independently  for  those  candidates  regardless  of  party 
whose  record  or  promises  with  reference  to  labor  legislation  are 
satisfactory.82  At  the  other  extreme  are  the  radicals,  who  favor 

so  The  Tailor,  February,  1914,  p.  18. 

si -Up  to  this  point  the  jurisdictional  question  in  the  clothing  trades,  and 
the  effort  to  secure  an  understanding  among  the  various  organizations, 
were  mainly  trade  union  matters  internal  to  the  industry,  and  had  only  a 
limited  connection  with  political  movements  (cf.  supra,  pp.  85,  103)  or 
with  the  development  of  factions  in  the  general  labor  movement.  From 
now  on,  however,  the  relation  of  the  movements  in  the  tailoring  trade  to  the 
Socialist  and  industrial  unionist  movement  as  a  whole  assumes  an  increasing 
importance. 

82  The  conditions  in  the  recent  election,  in  which  probably  a  majority  of 


535]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  107 

industrial  unionism,  and  who  are  eager  for  ''education"  and 
political  activity  along  Socialist  lines.  This  group  is  quite  uni- 
formly opposed  to  the  present  administration,  headed  by  Presi- 
dent Gompers,  and  favors  the  referendum  rather  than  the  con- 
vention for  the  election  of  A.  F.  of  L.  officers,  hoping  in  this  way 
to  elect  more  ' '  progressive ' '  candidates.  Finally  we  distinguish 
a  middle  group,  which  we  may  call  if  we  like  the  ''liberal" 
group,  whose  members  favor  trade  union  methods  for  trade 
union  purposes,  but  are  impatient  toward  the  old  parties  polit- 
ically, and  have  no  bias  in  favor  of  craft  unionism,  if  federations, 
alliances  or  amalgamations  can  be  proved  to  be  more  effective. 
In  this  group  would  be  found  both  adherents  and  opponents  of 
President  Gompers.  It  is  obvious  that  it  is  impossible  to  draw 
the  line  sharply.  For  example,  even  the  "conservatives,"  as 
here  denned,  favor  the  alliance  or  amalgamation  of  closely  re- 
lated trades,  as  a  method  of  settling  jurisdictional  disputes,  pro- 
vided all  of  the  factions  are  agreeable.  But  in  a  general  way 
the  differences  of  opinion  here  outlined  exist,  and  the  terms 
"conservative"  and  "radical"  (or  "progressive")  would  be 
intelligible  to  any  trade  unionist,  while  he  would  recognize  the 
existence  of  a  middle  group  corresponding  to  what  we  have 
called  the  "liberals." 

The  movement  in  the  direction  of  radical  opinion,  as  above 
outlined,  has  been  of  great  importance  in  the  history  of  the 
Tailors '  Union,  particularly  in  the  last  fifteen  years.83  The  elec- 
tion of  1909,  when  Secretary  Lennon  was  superseded  by  Secre- 
tary Brais,  was  regarded  by  the  latter 's  supporters  as  something 
in  the  nature  of  a  Socialist  revolution.  Mr.  Brais  was  recog- 
nized in  the  Buffalo  convention  as  the  leader  of  the  radical  group, 
(or  "Progressives,"  as  they  called  themselves)84  and  became  a 
candidate  for  secretary  on  a  frank  Socialist  and  industrial  union- 

the  members  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  supported  President  Wilson,  must  be  re- 
garded as  somewhat  exceptional. 

83  The  first  clear-cut  effort  to  commit  the  Tailors'  Union  officially  to 
Socialist  principles  appears  to  have  been  made  in  1903,  when  a  proposition 
to  endorse  the  national  platform  of  the  Socialist  party  was  submitted  to  the 
committee  on  laws  and  audit  by  the  1'argo,  N.  D.,  local  union.  The  Tailor, 
August,  1903,  p.  16,  col.  2. 

s*  Mr.  Brais  no  doubt  numbered  among  his  supporters  also  some  members 
who  would  be  classed  as  ' '  liberals ' '  under  our  foregoing  analysis. 


108  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [536 

ist  platform.85  Following  his  inauguration  the  tone  of  the  official 
journal  became  increasingly  Socialistic,  and  it  was  under  his 
administration  that  the  radical  changes  of  1913  were  initiated. 

ss  The  respective  positions  of  the  leading  candidates  in  this  election  are 
indicated  by  the  following  extracts  from  their  letters  of  acceptance: 

Extract  from  letter  of  acceptance  of  E.  J.  Brais;  The  Tailor,  November, 
1909,  p.  1: 

' '  Industrial  conditions  determine  the  well-being  of  the  worker,  and  dic- 
tate an  industrial  form  of  organization,  that  can  promote  and  defend  his 
interest  of  today  and  meet  the  requirements  of  the  future. 

"The  integral  Industrial  Union  is  superior  to  all  others  to  meet  the 
needs  of  education  and  organization  of  the  working  class.  Another  im- 
portant weapon  which  the  workers  must  recognize  and  use,  is  the  ballot. 
I  do  not  want  anyone  to  misunderstand  me,  or  run  away  with  the  idea  that 
it  is  a  dream,  not  practical,  that  it  is  contrary  to  trade  unionism  or  in 
opposition  to  the  trade  union  movement.  I  am  a  trade  unionist,  am  not 
trying  to  blend  trade  unionism  with  politics,  but  I  do  stand  for  political 
action  of  workers,  independent  of  the  parties  that  represent  the  exploiting 
class,  believing  that  it  would  be  of  great  benefit  to  the  working  class.  I 
do  not  want  the  unions  to  go  into  politics,  but  I  do  want  the  members  as 
individuals  to  go  to  the  polls  and  vote  for  their  interest.  This  I  shall 
advocate  wherever  and  whenever  possible." 

Extract  from  letter  of  acceptance  of  John  B.  Lennon;  The  Tailor,  Oc- 
tober, 1909,  pp.  4-5: 

"Much  has  been  said  in  the  trade  union  movement,  and  in  our  union  as 
well  as  others,  regarding  the  matter  of  being  progressive  as  to  political 
action  by  the  working  classes.  Some  of  our  members,  some  outside  our 
union,  have  charged  me  with  being  reactionary.  The  charge  is  absolutely 
false  and  without  foundation  in  fact,  but  I  am  perfectly  willing  to  state 
just  what  I  believe  upon  this  subject,  and  I  do  not  want  to  be  misunderstood 
by  anybody.  In  our  country,  it  is  self-evident  that  the  wage-workers  are 
not  yet  ready  to  act  unitedly  along  political  lines.  There  is  no  general 
agreement  as  to  what  the  proper  line  of  political  action  should  be.  Con- 
sequently, any  official  action  by  a  union  can  be  only  a  disturbing  factor  in 
an  organization  and  not  one  promoting  harmony  and  unity  in  the  accom- 
plishment of  better  trade  conditions.  I  believe  that  in  accord  with  the 
fundamental  principles  of  trade  unionism  every  member  has  a  right  to 
hold  and  exercise  such  political  and  religious  views  as  their  own  reason 
and  conscience  may  dictate  without  any  official  interference  from  the  organi- 
zation. ...  A  member  has  a  right  under  the  laws  and  principles  of 
trade  unionism  to  be  a  Catholic  or  a  Protestant  or  an  Agnostic,  as  he 
chooses,  and  the  organization  has  no  right  whatever,  nor  have  the  officers 
any  right,  to  interfere  with  the  exercise  of  that  privilege  by  the  individual 
member  in  any  way,  shape  or  manner.  And  what  i*  true  of  a  man's  reli- 
gious belief  is  equally  true  politically.  They  have  a  right  to  be  Socialists, 


537]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  109 

There  is  strong  evidence  that  the  campaign  which  resulted  in 
these  changes  in  the  Tailors'  Union  was  only  part  of  a  larger 
campaign  for  the  control  of  the  whole  union  movement  in  the 
clothing  industry  by  the  Socialists  and  industrial  unionists. 

For  some  time  there  had  been  unrest  in  the  United  Garment 
Workers'  and  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  organizations,  on 
account  of  the  alleged  conservatism  of  the  men  at  the  head  of 
these  organizations.  These  officers  were  of  the  "old  school" 
represented  by  President  Gompers  and  other  leaders  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor.  Friction  between  this  type  of 
men  and  the  members  of  the  garment  workers'  unions  was  in- 
evitable. Many  of  the  immigrants  who  have  come  over  by  the 

Democrats,  Republicans,  Prohibitionists  or  anything  or  nothing  in  politics 
they  each  one  desire ;  and  the  organization  has  no  right  to  interfere.  .  .  . 
We  need  in  the  trade  union  to  make  it  a  success  men  and  women  of  all 
religious  views  and  men  and  women  of  all  political  views.  If  some  faith 
or  some  party  is  made  a  requisite  of  membership,  then  there  will  be  no 
union  left,  and  nothing  accomplished,  and  I  am  against  anything  of  that 
kind.  ...  I  hold  that  the  trade  union  is  the  logical  and  only  possible 
practical  step  that  the  wage-working  class  of  the  world  could  adopt  at 
this  time  for  the  promotion  of  their  industrial  betterment.  .  .  .  Phi- 
losophers, poets  and  would-be  economists  have  spun  most  beautiful  theories 
-  beautiful  to  them  at  any  rate  -  as  to  the  complete  emancipation  of  the 
workers  from  all  injustices  imposed  upon  them.  As  dreams  they  were  a 
success.  As  emancipators  they  were  a  failure.  The  trade  union  as  a  dream 
is  a  failure.  As  a  practical  evolutionary  method  of  improving  the  social, 
industrial,  physical  and  moral  condition  of  the  working  classes,  it  is  the 
greatest  success  the  world  has  seen." 

It  should  not  be  supposed  that  the  only  issues  in  the  election  were  those 
outlined  in  the  above  letters.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  the 
presence  of  real  or  imagined  grievances  against  the  administration  resulting 
from  the  control  of  strikes  and  other  matters  handled  from  headquarters, 
together  with  a  campaign  of  personal  abuse  which  was  carried  on  by  certain 
members  who  believed  themselves  to  be  personally  wronged  by  the  general 
secretary,  had  much  to  do  with  the  result;  and  there  is  some  evidence  that 
the  "wet"  and  "dry"  issue  was  not  altogether  absent,  Mr.  Lennon  being 
well  known  as  a  "dry"  advocate.  In  fact,  it  is  not  by  any  means  certain 
that  upon  the  Socialist  and  industrial  unionist  issues  alone  Mr.  Brais 
could  have  been  elected.  An  analysis  of  the  vote  in  the  1909  election,  as 
compared  with  the  vote  on  amalgamation  with  a  certain  faction  of  the 
garment  workeres  in  1914  (infra,  p.  113)  shows  clearly  that  the  vote  for 
Lennon  and  Brais  did  not  by  any  means  follow  the  question  of  conservative 
or  "progressive"  doctrines  as  a  sole  issue. 


110  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [538 

thousands  from  Europe  in  recent  years  and  entered  the  clothing 
trades  do  not  accept  with  good  grace  the  restraints  of  conserva- 
tive unionism,  nor  do  they  lay  aside  readily  the  syndicalist  tend- 
encies so  prevalent  today  in  Europe.  In  justice  it  should  be 
said  that  in  some  localities,  notably  New  York  and  Chicago,  the 
garment  workers  have  conducted  large  and  successful  strikes,  in 
some  cases  without  being  affiliated  at  the  outset  with  the  national 
unions  at  all.  The  success  of  these  strikes,  however,  has  de- 
pended largely  upon  public  sympathy  and  upon  the  donations 
of  unions  throughout  the  country.  In  fact,  in  many  cases  the 
workers  have  joined  the  union  solely  to  participate  in  the  strike, 
and  when  the  object  of  the  strike  was  accomplished,  they  have 
ceased  to  pay  dues.86  But  the  success  of  such  strikes,  coupled 

86  A  somewhat  humorous  account  of  a  garment  workers '  strike  from  the 
journeymen  tailors'  standpoint  is  found  in  the  following  editorial  (The 
Tailor,  June  1,  1915,  p.  3) : 

"The  only  way  the  U.  G.  W.  can  increase  their  membership  is  through 
the  means  of  a  general  strike.  When  the  strike  is  over  thousands  drop  the 
union,  until  there  is  another  general  strike.  A  general  strike  in  the  ready- 
made  clothing  trade  is  a  money-making  proposition.  Months  before  the 
strike  is  declared  they  take  in  so-called  members  on  the  payment  of  fifty 
cents ;  when  the  strike  is  declared  they  charge  them  no  less  than  three  dollars. 
.  .  .  When  the  strike  is  on  a  few  weeks,  the  national  officers,  under  the 
guiding  light  of  a  lawyer,  make  agreements  with  as  many  firms  as  they  can 
and  then  announce  that  the  strike  is  over.  As  soon  as  the  strike  is  de- 
clared, the  hat  is  passed  in  all  unions  in  the  country  by  some  of  the  most 
skillful  beggars." 

The  above  account  may  appear  to  be  a  little  biased,  but  is  confirmed  in 
a  measure  by  the  following  statements  from  the  Garment  Workers'  journal 
itself: 

"Owing  to  the  struggle  between  capital  and  labor,  the  odds  are  against 
us,  mainly  because,  first,  only  a  part  of  the  workers  are  organized,  and 
secondly,  those  who  are  organized,  and  who  receive  through  their  union 
higher  wages  and  better  working  conditions,  often  fail  to  maintain  their 
membership,  believing  that  there  is  no  necessity  of  paying  their  dues,  and 
that  whenever  need  arises,  caused  by  poorer  conditions,  etc.,  they  can  again 
affiliate,  knowing  that  the  lapse  in  their  membership  will  not  result  in  any 
form  of  punishment  or  loss  to  them  in  benefits,  as  would  be  the  case  if 
such  funds  [i.  e.,  benefit  funds]  existed."  (Report  of  President  Rickert 
of  the  United  Garment  Workers  to  the  1914  convention,  Nashville,  October 
12-17,  1914.  The  Garment  Worker,  October  16,  1914,  p.  1.) 

Also  the  following,  from  same  report,  p.  6: 

' '  A  few  months  before  the  strike  the  total  membership  in  Greater  New 
York  averaged  less  than  four  thousand.  ...  A  general  strike  was 


539]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  111 

with  the  spread  of  Socialist  and  industrialist  ideas,  has  led  the 
workers  to  believe  that  the  mass  movement,  the  industrial  union 
and  the  general  strike  are  more  effective  weapons  than  craft 
unionism,  conservative  leadership  and  the  accumulation  of  a 
strike  fund.  To  indicate  all  of  the  reasons  for  the  estrangement 
between  a  large  element  of  the  Garment  Workers  and  their  na- 
tional officers  would  lead  us  too  far  afield.87  We  can  note  here 
only  the  effect  of  the  condition  described  upon  the  various  organ- 
izations. 

The  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union,  at  the  convention  of 
this  union  in  Cleveland,  Ohio,  June  1-13,  1914,  elected  a  new  set 
of  national  officers.  It  is  presumed  that  these  new  officers  were 
in  harmony  with  Socialist  and  industrial  tendencies,  since  at  the 
same  time  the  convention  declared  that  no  official  should  be  al- 
lowed to  run  for  political  office  on  any  ' '  capitalistic ' '  ticket,  and 
adopted  a  resolution  favoring  the  amalgamation  of  all  the  cloth- 
ing trades.88 

The  effort  in  the  United  Garment  Workers'  Union  to  displace 
the  conservative  administration  represented  by  President  Rickert 
and  Secretary  Larger,  was  not  so  successful.  These  officers  had 
resisted  overtures  on  the  part  of  the  Tailors'  Industrial  Union 
for  amalgamation,  alleging,  according  to  the  Tailors'  journal, 
that  the  Tailors'  Union  was  on  the  decline  and  would  eventually 

called,  which  took  place  on  Dec.  30,  1912  .  .  .  more  than  fifty  thousand 
workers  walked  out  within  a  few  days.  The  number  gradually  increased 
so  that  within  a  few  weeks  a  conservative  estimate  placed  the  number  out 
on  strike  at  110,000." 

87  In  a  letter  addressed  to  the  1914  convention  of  the  United  Garment 
Workers,  Mr.  Benjamin  Schweitzer,  a  prominent  organizer  in  that  union 
and  evidently  a  spokesman  for  the  administration,  gives  the  history  of  the 
New  York  strike  of  1912,  and  states  that  the  settlement  agreed  to  by 
President  Rickert  was  attacked  by  opponents  of  the  national  officers,  and 
that  these  opponents  were  supported  by  the  Jewish  publication,  Forward. 
This  journal,  he  says,  has  continued  to  publish  attacks  on  the  national  offi- 
cers. (The  Garment  Worker,  October  23,  1914,  p.  1.)  It  seems  certain  that 
racial  and  religious  feeling  has  had  much  to  do  with  the  formation  of  fac- 
tions in  the  garment  workers'  unions.  When  in  New  York  the  writer  of 
this  thesis  found  that  the  Jewish  workers  in  the  clothing  industry  had  a 
federation  of  their  own  known  as  the  United  Hebrew  Trades,  and  were 
acting  almost  independently  of  the  national  officers  of  the  Garment  Work- 
ers' Union,  although  nominally  affiliated  with  that  body. 

ss  The  Tailor,  July,  1914,  pp.  2-3.  , 


112  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [540 

have  to  succumb  to  the  newer  organizations  on  their  own  terms.89 
The  apparent  opposition  of  these  officers  to  the  industrial  move- 
ment, together  with  other  difficulties  of  some  years'  standing,  a 
part  of  which  have  already  been  discussed,  led  to  increased  dis- 
affection, and  at  the  convention  of  the  United  Garment  Workers 
at  Nashville,  Tenn.,  in  October,  1914,  143  delegates,  mostly  from 
New  York  City,  and  representing  in  the  main  workers  on  cheap 
custom  tailoring,90  claiming  that  they  had  been  fraudulently  un- 
seated by  the  Rickert-Larger  faction,  held  a  convention  of  their 
own,  elected  officers,  and  declared  themselves  favorable  to  amal- 
gamation of  the  clothing  trades.91 

It  was  not  long  before  negotiations  were  on  foot  for  the  amal- 
gamation of  the  Tailors'  Industrial  Union  with  the  seceding  fac- 
tion of  the  Garment  Workers.  This  movement  is  not  surprising 
when  it  is  recalled  that  the  leaders  of  both  of  these  organizations 
were  in  essential  accord  politically  and  in  their  attitude  toward 
industrial  unionism.  For  a  considerable  time  prior  to  the  Nash- 
ville episode,  the  Tailors'  journal  had  been  full  of  articles  advo- 

89  The  Tailor,  December  29,  1914,  p.  3,  col.  1. 

9<>  It  will  be  recalled  that  the  local  union  of  Journeymen  Tailors  in  New 
York  City  had  confined  itself  to  organizing  the  better  class  of  custom  tailor- 
ing, the  cheap  custom  workers  being  left  to  the  Garment  Workers. 

si  The  Tailor,  December  29,  1914,  p.  3.  The  administration  side  of  this 
affair  is  given  by  Mr.  Benjamin  Schweitzer  in  a  statement  published  in 
The  Garment  Worker,  October  30,  1914,  in  which  Mr.  Schweitzer  alleges 
that  the  report  of  the  credentials  committee  was  still  pending  when  the 
seceding  delegates  "bolted,"  and  that  the  split  was  premeditated  by  these 
delegates. 

A  long  defense  of  the  seceders'  position  is  found  in  the  report  of  the 
officers  of  the  seceding  faction  to  the  special  convention  of  that  group  held 
in  New  York  City  in  the  latter  part  of  December,  1914.  A  part  of  this 
report  is  reprinted  in  TJie  Tailor,  January  26,  1915. 

That  the  new  administration  of  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union 
and  the  new  organization  of  garment  workers  formed  at  Nashville  were  in 
essential  agreement  is  evidenced  by  the  conduct  of  the  delegates  of  the 
Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union,  one  of  whom  was  the  president  of  the 
union,  at  the  1916  convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor.  These 
delegates  defended  the  seceding  organization  of  garment  workers  and  op- 
posed action  designed  to  discipline  the  seceding  union  by  declaring  a  boycott 
among  the  A.  F.  of  L.  unions  on  clothing  made  by  firms  having  an  agree- 
ment with  the  seceders.  See  Baltimore  Evening  Sun,  November  25,  1916, 
p.  14;  also  Jewish  Daily  Forward,  November  26,  1916. 


541]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  113 

eating  amalgamation,  the  administration  evidently  desiring  to 
prepare  the  minds  of  the  members  for  a  move  of  this  character. 
Soon  after  the  Nashville  convention,  Mr.  Sidney  Hillman,  presi- 
dent of  the  seceding  faction  of  the  Garment  Workers,  and  a  com- 
mittee of  his  organization,  appeared  before  the  General  Execu- 
tive Board  of  the  Tailors'  Union  to  discuss  the  proposition.  An 
agreement  was  finally  worked  out  for  the  formation  of  an  amal- 
gamated organization,  as  follows: 

AGREEMENT  »2 

First,  this  organization  shall  be  known  as  the  Amalgamated  Clothing 
Workers  of  America. 

Second,  the  officers  shall  consist  of:  General  President,  General  Sec- 
retary, General  Treasurer,  General  Auditor,  and  eleven  General  Executive 
Board  members,  three  of  whom  must  be  from  the  Tailors'  Industrial  Union. 

Third,  the  G.  E.  B.  shall  organize  the  industry  into  departments  when 
conditions  warrant.  Such  department  shall  have  full  control  of  their  own 
funds  and  shall  have  the  right  to  make  such  laws  to  govern  their  department 
as  they  see  fit,  providing  such  laws  do  not  conflict  with  the  general  laws. 

Fourth,  per  capita  tax  payable  to  General  Office  shall  be  no  less  than 
fifteen  cents  per  month  for  each  member  in  good  standing. 

Fifth,  method  of  election  of  general  officers  to  be  left  until  after  the 
amalgamation.  Then  for  the  general  membership  to  decide  by  referendum. 

The  above  agreement  was  submitted  to  a  general  vote  of  the 
Tailor's  Union.  As  the  call  for  a  vote  was  published  in  the  jour- 
nal of  December  15,  1914,  and  the  vote  was  required  to  be  at 
headquarters  December  24,  1914,  the  matter  was  of  necessity 
acted  upon  hastily,  and  it  has  been  charged  by  the  opponents 
of  amalgamation  that  this  was  done  purposely.93  However  this 
may  be,  the  proposition  was  carried  by  a  vote  of  3,441  to  2,486. 
The  total  vote  of  5,927  represented  about  one-half  of  the  voting 
strength  of  the  union.  Of  a  total  of  280  local  unions,  219  sent 
in  their  vote  in  time  to  be  counted.94 

On  December  26,  1914,  two  days  after  the  close  of  the  Tailors' 
vote  on  the  amalgamation,  the  Hillman  faction  of  the  Garment 

92  The  Tailor,  December  15,  1914. 

as  The  Tailor,  January  5,  1915,  p.  4.  Letter  of  C.  M.  Rakow,  in  ' '  open 
forum"  column. 

9*  The  Tailor,  January  5  and  January  19,  1915.  The  final  vote  as  given 
above  is  quoted  from  the  issue  of  January  19,  as  the  returns  published  in 
the  issue  of  January  5  required  some  slight  corrections. 

For  purposes  of  comparison  the  following  statement  is  given,  covering  all 
votes  taken  by  the  Tailors'  Union,  either  upon  the  question  of  jurisdiction 


114  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [542 

Workers  held  a  special  convention,  in  New  York  City.  This  con- 
vention was  attended  by  two  "fraternal  delegates"  from  the 
Tailors'  Industrial  Union.  A  telegram  received  from  the  gen- 
eral office  of  the  Tailors'  Union,  indicating  that  the  amalgama- 
tion proposition  had  been  carried  by  that  organization,  was  re- 
ceived with  much  enthusiasm.  The  Garment  Workers'  conven- 
tion did  not  undertake  to  legislate  for  the  whole  amalgamation, 
but  for  itself  it  passed  the  following  important  measures:  (1) 
The  name,  " Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers  of  America,"  was 
adopted;  (2)  the  per  capita  tax  of  members  was  fixed  at  15  cents 
per  month;  (3)  it  was  stipulated  that  no  member  should  have 
the  right  to  belong  to  two  unions  of  the  same  trade  at  one  and 
the  same  time  (apparently  this  was  aimed  at  the  old  United 
Garment  Workers'  Union,  from  which  the  Hillman  faction  had 
withdrawn)  ;  (4)  the  salary  of  president  was  set  at  $50  per  week 
and  expenses,  and  the  salary  of  secretary  at  $50  per  week;  (5) 
appointment  and  salaries  of  general  organizers  were  left  in  the 
hands  of  the  General  Executive  Board;  (6)  Mr.  Sidney  Hillman 
was  re-elected  president,  and  Mr.  Joseph  Schlossberg  re-elected 
general  secretary;  (7)  the  members  of  the  General  Executive 
Board  were  re-elected  and  one  vacancy  filled;  (8)  provision  was 
made  for  conventions  to  be  held  biennially,  and  the  city  of 
Rochester,  New  York,  was  chosen  as  the  place  for  the  next  con- 
vention.95 

Although  the  Hillman  group  had  adopted  for  itself  the  name 
proposed  in  the  original  agreement  for  the  amalgamation  as  a 
whole,  it  did  not  thereby  consolidate  its  interests  with  those  of 

over  cheap  custom  tailoring,  or  upon  the  question  of  amalgamation  with 
the  Garment  Workers: 

Total  Per  cent,  total  vote 

Date  of  vote      Yes    No     Total  vote     membership  (est.)         of  all  members 

Nov.    1897       2133     233         2366                     5700  41.5 

Mch.    1899         905  1695         2600                     6200  42.0 

Nov.    1901       1212  3511         4723                     9700  48.6 

Aug.    1903       3422  3657         7079                   14500  49.0 

Feb.     1906       2383  4083         6466                   13500  48.0 

Nov.    1909       3971  1319         5290                   13000  40.1 

Dec.     1914       3441  2486         5927                   13000  45.6 

July    1915       1339  3961         5300                   13000  40.1 

»5  The  Tailor,  January  5,  1915,  p.  2.  Beport  of  Fraternal  Delegates  to 
the  special  convention  of  the  garment  workers. 


543]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  115 

the  Tailors.  In  articles  under  the  date  of  January  19,  1915, 
Secretary  Brais  of  the  Tailors'  Union  took  pains  to  point  out 
that  the  new  officers  of  the  Hillman  group,  now  known  as  ' '  The 
Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers  of  America, ' '  were  representing 
their  own  branch  only,  but  that  as  soon  as  provision  could  be 
made,  the  joint  organizations  would  elect  permanent  officers  for 
the  amalgamation.  Mr.  Brais  pointed  out  further  that  the  vote 
of  his  organization  to  amalgamate  did  not  by  any  means  "finish 
the  job,"  but  that  numerous  difficulties  were  still  to  be  faced. 
In  this  connection  he  said : 

The  members  must  remember  that  we  have  different  dues;  pay  sick, 
death  and  strike  benefits;  and  that  due  provision  must  be  made  to  guard 
against  any  of  our  funds  being  used  for  any  other  purpose  than  that  speci- 
fied by  our  constitution.  The  systems  of  production  differ  very  largely. 
Where  our  international  union  deals  with  small  groups  working  for  small 
firms,  the  Garment  Workers  work  for  large  manufacturers,  where  many 
thousands  of  workers  are  employed.  To  frame  a  proposition  that  will  apply 
generally  is  a  proposition. 

In  the  same  issue  Mr.  Brais  indicated  that  negotiations  were 
on  foot  looking  toward  the  adoption  of  a  constitution  for  the 
amalgamation,  and  that  arrangements  had  been  made  for  a  con- 
ference to  be  held  in  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  between  the  executive 
boards  of  the  two  organizations.96 

The  Rochester  conference  took  place  January  16  and  17,  1915, 
the  two  executive  boards  acting  as  a  temporary  joint  executive 
council  for  the  amalgamation.  At  this  conference  a  constitu- 
tion was  adopted,  of  which  some  of  the  most  important  provi- 
sions were  as  follows : 97 

(1)  The  Preamble  laid  down  the  principles  of  industrial  unionism  as 
a  step  toward  the  ultimate  control  of  industry  by  the  working  class. 

(2)  The  name,  "Amalgamated   Clothing  Workers  of  America,"   was 
definitely  adopted  for  the  amalgamation. 

(3)  The  executive  power  was  vested  in  a  General  Executive  Council  of 
eleven  members,  of  whom  three  were  to  be  from  the  Journeymen  Tailors' 
Department. 

(4)  Provision  was  made  for  legislation  by  a  biennial  convention,  or  by 
the   Executive    Council    between   conventions,    all    amendments  to   be    con- 
firmed by  referendum  vote. 

(5)  Four  general  officers  were  provided  for:     general  president,  gen- 

96  Tlie  Tailor,  January  19,  1915. 

07  Proceedings  of  the  General  Executive  Council,  Rochester,  N.  Y.  (Not 
printed.) 


116  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [544 

eral  vice-president  and  editor,  general  secretary  and  general  treasurer; 
these  four  officers  to  be  ex  officio  members  of  the  General  Executive  Council. 
Salary  of  general  president,  general  vice-president  and  general  secretary 
was  set  at  $40  per  week;  of  general  treasurer,  $50  per  year. 

(6)  Per  capita  tax  to  the  national  organization  was  set  at  15  cents  per 
member  per  month;  dues  to  the  local  union  to  be  not  less  than  50  cents  per 
member  per  month.     It  was  stipulated,  "All  assessments  shall  take  prece- 
dence over  per  capita  tax, ' '  but  no  statement  was  made  as  to  conditions 
under  which  assessments  could  be  levied.     Strikes  were  placed  under  control 
of  the  General  Executive  Council,  but  no  provision  was  made  for  sick,  death 
or  strike  benefits. 

(7)  Male  or  female  workers  not  less  than  sixteen  years  of  age,  em- 
ployed in  the  manufacture  of  clothing,  were  made  eligible  to  membership, 
but  no  member  was  allowed  to  be  a  member  of  more  than  one  local  union 
at  the  same  time,  nor  of  any  other  organization  of  the  trade,  under  a  pen- 
alty of  fine  or  expulsion  by  the  L.  U.  of  which  he  was  first  a  member. 

Other  provisions  were  confined  in  the  main  to  routine  matters. 

The  constitution  as  adopted  by  the  conference  made  no  provi- 
sion for  its  own  ratification  by  the  members.  In  his  report  upon 
the  conference,  Secretary  Brais  of  the  Tailors  said : 

This  constitution  will  be  published  and  put  out  to  a  vote  of  the  members 
for  ratification,  as  soon  as  the  matters  are  corrected  and  things  gotten  into 
shape.  ...  To  inject  at  this  time  the  nomination  and  election  of  offi- 
cers, the  introduction  of  new  laws  and  propositions  by  local  unions,  would 
only  confuse  the  situation.  It  was  thought  best  to  first  establish  the  founda- 
tion, after  which  the  membership  would  have  an  opportunity  of  handling 
the  entire  matter  as  they  saw  fit.  ...  All  these  things  will  be  presented 
to  the  membership  in  due  time. 

In  addition  to  the  adoption  of  the  formal  constitution,  the  con- 
ference decided  that  both  organizations  should  begin  to  pay  per 
capita  tax  to  the  amalgamated  organization  on  February  1,  1915 ; 
that  for  the  time  being,  separate  headquarters  should  be  main- 
tained, the  Tailors  in  Chicago  and  the  Amalgamated  Clothing 
Workers  in  New  York;  that  the  Tailors'  branch  should  be  known 
as  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Department  of  the  Amalgamated 
Clothing  Workers  of  America,  while  the  Garment  Workers' 
branch  should  be  known  as  the  Clothing  Workers  of  America ; 
and  that  no  convention  should  be  held  until  September,  1916. 
The  joint  executive  council  was  to  serve  until  that  time.  Tem- 
porary officers  were  elected,  as  follows:  president,  Sidney  Hill- 
man;  vice-president,  J.  Schlossberg;  general  secretary,  E.  J. 
Brais;  general  treasurer,  T.  Lapan. 


545]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  117 

Mr.  Brais  concluded  his  report  of  the  conference  in  the  Tailors' 
journal  with  a  warning  to  the  members  that  the  American  Fed- 
eration of  Labor,  in  his  judgment  a  "reactionary"  body,  would 
oppose  the  "progressive"  amalgamation,  and  advised  them  to 
stand  ' '  firmly  and  determinedly ' '  against  all  opposition.98 

Two  weeks  after  his  appointment  as  general  secretary  for  the 
amalgamated  organization,  Mr.  Brais  resigned  from  his  position 
as  general  secretary  of  the  Tailors'  Union.  The  executive  board 
of  the  Tailors  appointed  Mr.  Thomas  Sweeney  to  fill  the  vacancy, 
pending  an  election."  The  appointment  of  Mr.  Sweeney  was 
later  confirmed  by  a  general  election,100  and  he  has  held  his  posi- 
tion as  secretary  until  the  present  date.101 

Immediately  following  the  action  of  the  Tailors'  Union  ap- 
proving the  proposed  amalgamation,  an  internal  controversy  of 
very  considerable  proportions  arose  in  that  union,  due  to  the 
conviction  on  the  part  of  a  large  number  of  members  that  the 
action  had  been  taken  hastily  and  under  a  misapprehension  of 
its  real  significance.  It  was  not  long  before  this  dissatisfaction 
found  expression  in  an  organized  movement  to  secure  a  recon- 
sideration of  the  vote.  This  movement  centered  in  Local  Union 
No.  5  of  Chicago,  where  there  was  a  strong  majority  against  the 
amalgamation,  but  involved  eventually  a  large  number  of  local 
unions  and  members.  The  first  direct  evidence  of  the  reconsid- 
eration movement  is  found  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  General 

»8  The  Tailor,  January  26,  1915,  p.  3.  A  great  deal  of  violent  criticism, 
some  of  it  personal,  was  levied  against  the  A.  F.  of  L.  and  its  officers  dur- 
ing the  entire  discussion  of  the  amalgamation  proposal.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered, however,  that  the  opposition  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  was  not  directed 
against  the  amalgamation  idea  itself,  but  merely  against  amalgamation 
with  a  seceding  body.  In  this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  about 
January  1,  1915,  the  A.  F.  of  L.  had  ruled  that  the  Tailors'  label  could 
not  be  recognized  under  the  name,  "Tailors'  Industrial  Union,"  but  only 
under  the  old  name,  ' '  Journeymen  Tailors '  Union  of  America. ' '  Prob- 
ably as  the  result  of  this  ruling,  the  old  name  was  restored  on  the  title 
page  of  The  Tailor,  beginning  with  the  issue  of  January  12,  1915.  See  A. 
F.  of  L.  correspondence  on  the  subject  of  the  label,  The  Tailor,  January  19, 
1915,  p.  4. 

99  The  Tailor,  February  9,  1915,'  p.  1,  Proceedings  G.  E.  B. 

100  Two  ballots  were  necessary ;   the  deciding  vote  is  published  in   The 
Tailor,  October  5,  1915. 

101  February,  1917. 


118  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [546 

Executive  Board  for  January  3,  1915.102  At  this  meeting  a  let- 
ter was  read  from  the  secretary  of  the  Chicago  union,  endorsed 
by  the  local  executive  board,  protesting  against  the  whole  amal- 
gamation procedure.  As  the  national  executive  board  claimed 
to  have  acted  within  its  rights,  the  protest  was  "received  and 
filed. ' '  A  short  time  later,  the  executive  board  of  Local  Union 
No.  5  of  Chicago  issued  a  circular  to  all  local  unions  throughout 
the  country,  urging  them  to  second  the  Chicago  protest,  and  giv- 
ing reasons  why  this  should  be  done.  This  circular  was  followed 
by  others,  and  eventually  by  a  call  for  a  conference  to  be  held  in 
Chicago  March  27,  1915.  In  spite  of  warnings  against  "dis- 
rupters" issued  in  the  official  journal  by  the  administration  offi- 
cials, who  at  this  date  were  still  favorable  to  the  amalgama- 
tion,103 the  Chicago  call  was  answered  by  66  locals,  of  which  ten, 
including  Chicago,  sent  delegates  in  person,104  and  the  balance 
sent  letters  endorsing  the  Chicago  position. 

Several  meetings  were  held  in  Chicago,  additional  circulars 
were  sent  out,  and  a  committee  was  appointed  to  carry  on  the 
agitation.  The  expense  of  the  work  was  met  out  of  contributions 
from  unions  interested  in  the  movement.  The  protests  of  the 
Chicago  union  and  of  the  conference  committee,  as  indicated  in 
their  literature,  were  based  in  the  main  upon  the  following  al- 
leged grounds : 

(1)  That  the  time  allowed  for  the  vote  on  amalgamation  was 
entirely  inadequate,  and  made  it  impossible  for  the  matter  to  be 
thoroughly  presented  in  an  intelligible  way  to  the  members  of 
the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union.105 

(2)  That 106  it  is  contrary  to  trade  union  policy  and  prin- 
ciples for  a  recognized  union,  such  as  the  Tailors,  to  form  any 
alliance  or  amalgamation  with  a  faction  of  another  organization 

102  The  Tailor,  January  12,  1915,  p.  2. 

103  Tlie   Tailor,   February,   2,    1915,   p.    3,   article,    ' '  Disrupters   Active, 
Warning. ' ' 

104  Former  Secretary  Lennon  was  one  of  these  delegates  and  was  active 
in  supporting  the  protest  of  the  Chicago  conference.    Circular  letter  No.  1, 
p.  1,  list  of  delegates;  The  Tailor,  March  2,  1915,  p.  4,  article  by  Mr.  Len- 
non on  ' '  What  the  members  of  the  J.  T.  U.  of  A.  are  entitled  to  receive  at 
the  hands  of  their  general  officers." 

los  Circular  of  Chicago  union,  entitled  ' '  Protest  against  trickery. ' ' 


547]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  119 

who  have  seceded  from  their  parent  organization,  which  was  the 
case  in  the  instance  referred  to;  the  Garment  Workers'  faction, 
headed  by  one  Sidney  Hillman,  being  a  seceding  faction  from  the 
legitimate  union  of  the  United  Garment  Workers  of  America. 

(3)  That  the  question  as  submitted  was  not  a  plain  state- 
ment but  a  misleading  one,  and  was  submitted  in  that  way  in 
order  to  secure  a  favorable  vote.     The  membership  was  misled 
and  voted  "Yes"  upon  the  proposition,  believing  to  a  very  con- 
siderable extent  that  the  proposition  for  amalgamation  was  be- 
tween our  union  and  the  United  Garment  Workers  as  recognized 
by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  when  in  truth,  the  inten- 
tion was  to  amalgamate  with  the  seceding  faction  of  the  United 
Garment  Workers  under  the  leadership  of  Mr.  S.  Hillman.107 

(4)  That  the  proposed  constitution  for  the  amalgamation 
made  no  provision  for  the  protection  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors' 
Branch,  and  that  the  plan  proposed  would  result  in  the  trade 

107  < '  Circular  Letter  No.  1, ' '  issued  by  Chicago  conference  committee. 
Without  trying  to  go  into  all  of  the  details  of  the  controversy  or  into  the 
personalities  with  which  it  was  attended,  some  of  which  were  very  acrid,  it 
must  be  admitted  that  the  form  in  which  the  amalgamation  proposition 
first  reached  the  members  was,  to  say  the  least,  open  to  misunderstanding. 
It  has  been  stated  that  the  first  official  notice  calling  for  a  vote  appeared  in 
The  Tailor,  December  15,  1914,  and  this  is  correct;  but  in  the  preceding 
issue,  that  of  December  8,  it  was  conspicuously  announced  that  a  vote  would 
be  called  for  shortly,  and  it  was  in  this  preliminary  announcement  that  the 
greatest  opportunity  for  misconstruction  was  presented.  After  several 
' '  scare ' '  headings  calling  attention  to  the  forthcoming  vote,  appeared  the 
following  sentence: 

"The  General  Executive  Board  of  the  T.  I.  TJ.  I.  has  at  this  writing 
under  consideration  an  agreement  that  will,  if  adopted,  amalgamate  the 
United  Garment  Workers  of  America,  [italics  are  the  writer's]  represented 
by  S.  Hillman,  President,  and  Jos.  Schlossberg,  Secretary,  and  the  Tailors' 
Industrial  Union,  formerly  known  as  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  Amer- 
ica." 

It  is  obvious  that  to  a  member  who  was  not  familiar  with  the  split  in 
the  Garment  Workers'  organization,  and  who  was  not  aware  that  Hillman 
and  Schlossberg  were  not  the  officers  of  the  recognized  union,  the  above 
statement  would  have  been  misleading,  and  could  easily  have  led  him  to  be- 
lieve that  the  proposed  amalgamation  was  with  the  recognized  union.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  as  we  shall  see  later,  52  local  unions  that  gave  a  majority 
for  amalgamation  on  the  first  vote,  gave  a  majority  against  it  on  the  second, 
and  it  seems  probable  that  some  of  the  members  of  these  unions  did  not 
understand  the  proposition  the  first  time. 


120  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [548 

which  belonged  properly  to  the  Tailors  being  "gobbled  up"  by 
the  Garment  Workers.108 

For  the  above  reasons,  and  others  of  less  importance,  the  con- 
ference demanded  that  the  whole  question  of  jurisdiction  be  re- 
submitted  to  a  general  vote  under  the  following  two  heads : 

First,  shall  the  Tailors'  Industrial  Union  amalgamate  with  the  seceding 
faction  of  the  United  Garment  Workers? 

Second,  shall  the  Tailors'  Industrial  Union  comply  with  the  instructions 
of  the  Philadelphia  Convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  to 
resume  their  former  title,  "The  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of  America" 
and  resume  their  claims  of  jurisdiction  as  in  their  constitution  prior  to 
1914! 

To  understand  the  second  demand,  it  is  necessary  to  recall 
that  in  January,  1914,  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  had  given  a  decision  indicating  that  the 
change  of  name  and  extension  of  jurisdiction  adopted  by  the 
Tailors'  Union  in  1913  were  in  violation  of  the  constitution  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor.  At  the  time,  the  organiza- 
tions involved  were  requested  to  hold  a  conference,  and  to  en- 
deavor if  possible  to  bring  about  a  consolidation.  Inasmuch  as 
the  organizations  failed  to  do  this,  the  full  convention  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  in  November,  1914,  passed  a 
resolution  endorsing  the  report  of  the  Executive  Council  in  the 
matter  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors,  and  requiring  the  Tailors' 
Union  to  comply  with  the  constitution  of  the  Federation  not 
later  than  April  1,  1915,  on  pain  of  suspension.109 

Although  the  supporters  of  the  amalgamation  affected  to  de- 
spise the  influence  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the 
action  of  the  Federation  had  a  very  considerable  effect.  It  lay 
in  the  power  of  the  Federation  to  withdraw  its  endorsement 
entirely  from  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  label,  and  in  such  an 

108  Circular  Letter  No.  1,  cited  above.     There  seems  to  have  been  some 
ground  for  this  fear  on  the  part  of  the  Tailors,  inasmuch  as  they  had  only 
three  members  out  of  eleven  on  the  Executive  Council  of  the  amalgamated 
organization,  and  would  also  be  greatly  outnumbered  on  a  referendum,  the 
Hillman  faction  claiming  to  have  50,000  members,  while  the  Tailors  had 
about  13,000.     (The  United  Garment  Workers'  organization  has  never  ad- 
mitted that  the  Hillman  faction  had  as  many  as  50,000;  it  is  a  matter  very 
difficult  to  determine,  as  members  are  continually  falling  behind  with  their 
dues  in  all  of  the  garment  workers'  organizations.) 

109  Proceedings,  A.  F.  of  L.  Convention,  1914,  pp.  370-373. 


549]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  121 

event  this  label  would  become  practically  worthless.110  That 
some,  at  least,  of  the  Tailors  recognized  this  is  shown  by  the 
strong  support  given  to  the  Chicago  protest.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  there  was  a  short  period  later  when  the  Tailors'  label  was 
actually  outlawed  by  the  Federation. 

The  demands  of  the  Chicago  conference  were  presented  to  the 
General  Executive  Board  of  the  Tailors'  Union  on  March  28, 
1915,  by  a  personal  delegation  representing  the  conference. 
The  Executive  Board  refused  to  accede  to  the  demands  in  the 
precise  form  in  which  they  were  made,  but  pointed  out  that  a 
proposition  for  reconsideration  of  the  vote  was  already  before 
the  board,  having  been  presented  at  the  meeting  of  February 
28,  1915,  by  Local  Union  No.  88  of  St.  Paul,  Minn.,  and  agreed 
that  if  the  St.  Paul  proposition  received  the  required  number  of 
seconds  (one  fourth  of  all  the  locals),  the  question  would  be  re- 
submitted  in  the  form  demanded  by  the  conference  committee. 
The  committee  expressed  itself  satisfied  with  this  action,  and  set 
about  at  once  to  secure  the  necessary  seconds.111  In  this  they 
were  very  successful,  and  at  the  meeting  of  the  Executive  Board 
on  May  2,  1915,  it  was  found  that  100  local  unions  had  seconded 
the  St.  Paul  proposition.  As  only  about  80  seconds  were  re- 
quired, this  number  was  amply  sufficient,  and  in  accord  with  its 
promise  the  board  agreed  to  resubmit  the  amalgamation  ques- 
tion and  the  other  questions  at  issue.  The  form  in  which  the 
questions  were  submitted  was  in  effect  the  same  as  that  recom- 
mended by  the  Chicago  committee,  but  it  was  decided  to  make 
three  heads  instead  of  two,  as  follows : 

(1)  Shall  our  International  be  known  as  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union 
of  America? 

no  A  few  organizations  have  succeeded  in  maintaining  a  successful  career 
outside  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  but  very  few  organizations 
that  depend  to  any  extent  upon  their  label  have  succeeded  in  doing  so.  It 
is  claimed  by  the  United  Garment  Workers  that  the  label  of  the  seceding 
organization  is  worthless  without  the  endorsement  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor,  and  that  firms  that  tried  to  use  the  label  of  the  seceders 
have  had  their  work  returned  to  them,  as  union  men  affiliated  with  the  A. 
F.  of  L.  refused  to  buy  it. 

in  Proceedings  General  Executive  Board  for  February  28,  1915,  The 
Tailor,  March  9,  1915,  p.  1;  Proceedings  for  March  28,  1915,  The  Tailor, 
April  6,  1915,  p.  1;  letter  of  conference  committee  to  Secretary  Sweeney, 
The  Tailor,  April  6,  1915,  p.  2. 


122  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [550 

(2)  Shall  our  International  return  to  the  jurisdiction  it  claimed  prior 
to  January  1,  1914,  as  ordered  by  the  A.  F.  of  L.  ? 

(3)  Shall   our   International   withdraw   its  affiliation  from  the  Amal- 
gamated Clothing  Workers  of  America? 

The  vote  was  required  to  be  at  headquarters  by  July  3,  1915.112 
Before  concluding  the  account  of  the  reconsideration  move- 
ment, it  is  necessary  to  go  back  a  little  and  see  how  actual  ef- 
forts to  operate  under  the  amalgamation  were  working  out.  It 
will  be  recalled  that  a  temporary  organization  had  been  effected 
at  a  joint  meeting  of  the  executive  boards  in  Rochester,  January 
16  and  17,  1915.  In  accord  with  the  action  taken  at  this  meet- 
ing, the  payment  of  per  capita  tax  by  the  Tailors  to  the  amal- 
gamated organization  was  begun  February  1,  1915,  amounting 
to  $1800  per  month.  The  payment  of  this  sum  brought  forth 
considerable  protest  from  the  dissenting  element  of  the  Tailors, 
who  claimed  that  the  whole  amalgamation  was  illegal  under  trade 
union  procedure ;  but  was  defended  by  the  administration  on  the 
ground  that  the  Tailors  would  get  it  back  in  the  services  of  the 
organizers,  all  of  whom  had  been  placed  under  the  direction  of 
the  Amalgamated.  The  real  test,  however,  of  the  amalgama- 
tion plan  came  in  New  York  City,  where  an  effort  was  made  to 
consolidate  three  local  unions  of  custom  tailors,  including  two 
unions  of  special  order  tailors  affiliated  with  the  Hillman  union, 
and  Local  Union  No.  390  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of 
America.  The  effort  to  find  a  basis  of  consolidation  for  these 
three  unions  met  with  a  number  of  obstacles,  of  which  the  most 
serious  was  the  evident  intention  of  the  garment  workers'  branch 
to  retain  control  of  the  special  order  workers,  although  the  Jour- 
neymen Tailors  had  been  assured  in  the  general  conferences  that 
the  special  order  workers  would  be  turned  over  to  their  branch. 
After  some  unsatisfactory  negotiations  the  local  officers  of  the 
Journeymen  Tailors '  Union  of  New  York  became  convinced  that 
there  was  no  intention  on  the  part  of  the  garment  workers  to 
change  their  attitude  on  the  subject  of  the  special  order  tailors, 
and  reported  to  this  effect  to  the  national  Executive  Board  of 
the  Journeymen  Tailors,  at  the  same  time  protesting  against  any 
further  payment  of  per  capita  tax  by  the  Tailors  to  the  Amal- 
gamated.113 

"2  Proceedings,  Tlie  Tailor,  May  11,  1915. 

"3  Letter  of  John  A.  Petrone,  in  The  Tailor,  May  11,  1915,  pp.  1-2;  also 
article,  "Some  Eeason,"  by  William  Block,  Tlie  Tailor,  April  20,  1915,  p.  4. 


551]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  123 

The  New  York  episode  was  of  the  greatest  importance  in  the 
history  of  the  amalgamation  affair,  for  it  was  this  episode,  more 
than  any  other  cause,  that  influenced  Secretary  Sweeney  of  the 
Journeymen  Tailors  to  abandon  his  support  of  the  amalgamation 
plan.  As  early  as  April  6,  1915,  Mr.  Sweeney  wrote : 114 

Eight  from  the  first  day  to  the  present,  we  insisted  on  one  thing.  That 
was  that  all  custom  tailors  should  belong  to  our  union.  Up  to  the  present 
time  that  is  not  carried  out  as  we  expected.  No  man  can  say  that  we  agreed 
to  anything  else,  and  if  any  man  or  number  of  men  think  they  can  induce 
us  to  change  our  attitude  on  that  point,  they  are  mistaken.  If  the  officers 
of  the  Amalgamation  are  not  in  a  position  to  state  exactly  where  the  line 
is  to  be-  drawn  on  this  question,  they  should  be.  If  we  are  only  to  have  the 
high  class  custom  and  a  few  label  houses,  then  amalgamation  is  a  one-sided 
affair. 

And  in  the  issue  of  April  20,  1915,  after  reciting  the  experi- 
ence of  the  New  York  union,  Mr.  Sweeney  said : 115 

So  far  as  we  know,  the  officers  of  the  A.  C.  W.  are  in  no  way  to  blame 
for  the  unsatisfactory  results  in  New  York  and  elsewhere.  They  cannot 
force  the  special  order  Tailors  into  our  union,  but  that  is  no  good  reason 
for  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  to  continue  paying  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  dollars  a  month  for  nothing -not  even  a  say  in  how  the  organizers 
are  to  be  distributed.  ...  If  we  are  to  have  amalgamation  at  all,  we 
would  have  to  reconstruct  the  whole  thing.  It  is  not  possible  to  run  it  as 
it  is  now  run,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned. 

From  this  time  on,  the  turn  of  sentiment  against  the  amalga- 
mation was  rapid,  and  when  the  vote  closed,  July  3,  1915,  it  was 
found  that  the  proposition  to  withdraw  was  carried,  3,961  to 
1,339.  On  the  proposition  to  resume  the  old  name,  "Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union  of  America,"  the  vote  was  4,702  to  822;  and  on 
the  proposition  to  resume  the  former  jurisdiction,  as  ordered  by 
the  A.  F.  of  L.,  the  vote  was  3,897  to  1,385.116 

In  explanation  of  the  reversal  of  opinion  indicated  by  these 
votes,  which,  in  spite  of  what  has  been  said,  may  appear  to  be  in- 
consistent with  the  previous  attitude  of  the  union,  as  indicated 
by  the  first  vote  on  amalgamation,  it  is  well  to  undertake  some 
further  analysis  of  the  votes.  A  comparison  of  the  first  vote  on 
amalgamation,  which  closed  in  December,  1914,  with  the  second 
vote,  which  closed  in  July,  1915,  indicated  that  fifty-two  unions 

11*  The  Tailor,  April  6,  1915,  p.  3. 

us  The  Tailor,  April  20,  1915,  editorial,  ' '  Amalgamation  not  Satisfac- 
tory. ' ' 

us  The  Tailor,  July  7,  1915,  p.  4. 


124  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [552 

that  gave  a  majority  favorable  to  amalgamation  on  the  first  vote, 
gave  a  majority  against  it  on  the  second  vote,  whereas  there  were 
only  four  unions  that  reversed  their  vote  in  the  opposite  direc- 
tion. It  is  not  certain  that  the  members  who  voted  on  the  ques- 
tion the  second  time  were  the  same  members  as  those  who  voted 
on  it  the  first  time,  the  total  vote  in  each  case  being  less  than 
fifty  per  cent  of  the  total  membership.117  If  we  assume,  how- 
ever, that  the  group  of  voters  in  the  two  cases  was  approximately 
the  same,  the  indications  are  that  the  vote  against  amalgamation 
on  the  second  ballot  included  the  vote  of  a  large  number  of  mem- 
bers who  voted  favorably  to  amalgamation  on  the  first  ballot. 
It  is  necessary,  therefore,  to  account  for  the  ''conversion"  of 
these  members.  It  is  obvious  that  the  immediate  propaganda  for 
the  reversal  of  the  vote  came  from  the  Chicago  conference,  but 
the  reasons  which  caused  a  number  of  members,  in  response  to 
this  propaganda,  to  reverse  their  previous  decision,  require  ex- 
amination. These  members  may  be  divided  into  the  following 
groups : 

(1)  Members  who  voted  for  the  amalgamation  on  the  first 
ballot,  believing  that  the  proposition  involved  the  union  of  Gar- 
ment Workers  recognized  by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
but  who  reversed  their  vote  when  they  discovered  that  the  amal- 
gamation was  with  a  seceding  body. 

(2)  Members  who  became  convinced  as  the  result  of  the  at- 
tempt to  put  the  amalgamation  into  effect  that  it  could  not  suc- 
ceed, either  (a)  on  account  of  the  opposition  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  or  (b)  on  account  of  the  difficulty  of  pro- 
tecting the  interests  of  the  custom  tailors'  branch  under  the 
terms  of  the  amalgamation. 

(3)  Members  who  at  the  time  of  the  first  vote  were  personal 
supporters  of  Secretary  Brais,  but  who  questioned  his  motives 
in  resigning  from  the  secretaryship  of  the  Tailors'  Union  and 
accepting  office  with  the  Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers,  and 
who  experienced  some  reaction  against  the  amalgamation  on  this 
account.118 

In  further  explanation  of  the  vote,  it  seems  probable  that  the 
active  propaganda  conducted  by  friends  of  the  amalgamation 

117  Cf.  supra,  p.  113,  note  94. 

us  The  Tailor,  March  2,  1915,  p.  4,  col.  3,  letter  of  A.  Dahlman. 


553]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  125 

plan  at  the  time  of  the  first  ballot  tended  to  swell  the  favorable 
vote  on  this  ballot ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  the  propaganda  by 
the  opponents  of  amalgamation  at  the  time  of  the  second  ballot 
had  a  similar  effect  in  the  direction  of  defeating  the  proposition. 
It  is  desired  to  emphasize  this  point  especially  in  connection  with 
the  "floating"  or  undecided  vote,  and  also  in  connection  with 
the  indifferent  element,  which  in  the  absence  of  an  active  propa- 
ganda would  not  vote  at  all.119 

In  consequence  of  the  compliance  of  the  Tailors'  Union  with 
the  instructions  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  the  union 
was  reinstated  in  the  good  graces  of  the  Federation,  and  the  1915 
convention  passed  resolutions  congratulating  the  Tailors  upon 
their  action,  and  confirming  the  full  re-affiliation  of  the  Tailors 
with  the  Federation.120 

Since  the  withdrawal  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors  from  the 
amalgamation,  the  question  of  forming  a  single  union  in  the 
clothing  trade  has  attracted  only  intermittent  attention.  In  The 
Tailor  for  December  7,  1915,  an  article  by  Mr.  Lennon  was  pub- 
lished, in  which  he  favored  the  formation  of  a  single  Interna- 
tional Union  composed  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors,  the  United 
Garment  Workers  and  the  Ladies'  Garment  Workers.  Each 

119  The  following  statement,  compiled  from  the  returns  on  the  two  votes 
on  the  amalgamation  question,  lends  support  to  the  explanations  here  ad- 
vanced : 

Analysis  of  returns  of  146  unions  that  voted  on  both  ballots 

1st  ballot  2nd  ballot 

Yes        No         Yes         No 

52  unions  that  voted  YES  on  the  first  ballot, 

and  NO  on  the  second:  1454        404         139         1597 

4  unions  that  voted  NO  on  the  first  ballot, 

and  YES  on  the  second:  50  60  75  43 

37  unions  that  voted  YES  on  the  first  ballot, 

and  YES  on  the  second:  1153         102         755  107 

53  unions  that  voted  NO  on  the  first  ballot, 

and  NO  on  the  second :  119       1554         139         1761 


Totals:  2776       2120       1108         3508 

Note:  The  returns  of  unions  that  did  not  vote  on  both  ballots  are 
omitted,  as  they  are  without  value  for  purposes  of  comparison. 

120  Proceed  ings,  A.  F.  of  L.,  1915,  p.  401,  report  of  committee  on  adjust- 
ment; ibid.,  pp.  119-121,  resume  of  all  action  by  the  A.  F.  of  L.  in  the 
matter  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors. 


126  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [554 

branch  was  to  be  guaranteed  self-government  and  the  protection 
of  its  peculiar  interests.  As  a  step  in  this  direction  a  permanent 
conference  committee  of  three  members  from  each  organization 
was  recommended,  this  conference  committee  to  carry  out  the 
highest  possible  degree  of  cooperation  between  the  three  organi- 
zations, and  to  extend  its  powers  to  such  an  extent  as  might  be 
approved  by  a  referendum  vote  of  the  organizations.121  The 
most  recent  utterances  on  the  subject  include  suggestions  from 
Mr.  Sweeney  for  the  drawing  up  of  propositions  for  the  reor- 
ganization of  the  clothing  trades  by  a  joint  committee  of  the 
"rank  and  file"  of  the  three  organizations,  officers  to  be  ex- 
cluded; also  propositions  from  the  official  organ  of  the  Ladies' 
Garment  Workers'  Union,  favorable  to  recognition  by  the  A.  F. 
of  L.  of  the  Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers'  Union,  (the  Hill- 
man  union),  and  a  possible  resumption  of  the  movement  for 
amalgamation  between  this  union  and  the  Journeymen  Tailors' 
Union  of  America.122  None  of  these  propositions  seems  likely  to 
receive  official  attention  before  the  convention  of  the  Journey- 
men Tailors'  Union  in  August,  1917,  and  in  view  of  the  attitude 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  at  its  1916  convention,  it 
is  not  probable  that  any  movement  involving  the  Amalgamated 
Clothing  AVorkers  will  receive  the  approval  of  the  Federation. 

CONCLUSIONS  12S 

1.  The  jurisdiction  question  in  the  tailoring  industry  is  the 
outgrowth  of  industrial  changes,  which  have  resulted  in  a  large 
part  of  the  work  formerly  done  by  journeymen  tailors  of  the  old 
type  being  done  by  workers  on  a  lower  economic  plane. 

2.  The  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  committed  a  serious  eco- 
nomic blunder  when  it  allowed  the  new  systems  of  custom  tailor- 
ing to  grow  up  outside  of  its  jurisdiction. 

3.  The  movement  for  unqualified  amalgamation  of  the  unions 
in  the  clothing  trades,  and  for  a  leveling  of  craft  lines  and  dif- 

121  The  Tailor,  December  7,  1915,  p.  3,  col.  4. 

122  The  Tailor,  February  13,  1917,  p.  3,  col.  1,  editorial ;   ibid.,  col.  2, 
article  reprinted  from  The  Ladies'  Garment  Worker,  entitled  "A  Tribute 
to  the  Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers  of  America. ' ' 

123  The  conclusions  here  presented  are  from  the  standpoint  of  the  jour- 
neymen tailors  themselves.      The  effects  of  the  jurisdiction  policy   on  the 
industry  at  large  will  be  considered  in  Ch.  IV,  ' '  General  Economic  Bear- 
ings." 


555]  MOVEMENT  TOWARD  INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  127 

ferences  of  trade  union  policy,  is  closely  associated  with  the 
Socialist  movement,  the  growth  of  which,  both  in  these  trades 
and  in  the  general  labor  movement,  is  partly  due  to  the  accession 
of  European  Socialists. 

4.  The  movement  for  an  alliance  or  federation  of  unions  in 
the  clothing  trades,  whereby  the  autonomy  of  each  interest  would 
be  preserved,  is  favored  by  the  conservative  elements,  and  is  not 
confined  to  the  Socialist  group. 

5.  It  is  not  probable  that  any  movement  for  amalgamation  or 
federation  in  the  clothing  trades  could  be  successful  except  under 
the  following  conditions : 

(a)  The  interests  of  those  unions  which  have  developed  their 
wages  and  union  resources  to  the  highest  point  must  be  protected. 

(b)  There  must  be  a  conviction  of  absolute  good  faith  on  the 
part  of  all  the  amalgamating  or  federating  elements. 

(c)  The  field  of  custom-made  clothing  of  the  grade  and  price 
heretofore  manufactured  mainly  by  journeymen  tailors  must  be 
regarded  as  a  unit  in  the  plan  of  amalgamation  or  federation, 
regardless  of  the  method  of  production. 

(d)  The  more  prosperous  branches  of  the  industry  must  lay 
aside  their  prejudices  and  cooperate  sincerely  for  the  interest  of 
the  less  prosperous  branches. 

(e)  The  cooperation  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  is 
essential. 

The  reasons  for  most  of  the  above  conclusions,  it  is  believed, 
are  sufficiently  evident  from  a  perusal  of  the  history  just  con- 
cluded. The  second  conclusion,  however,  which  from  the  econ- 
omic standpoint  is  believed  to  be  the  most  important,  requires 
some  further  comment.  It  seems  certain  that  the  refusal  of  the 
Journeymen  Tailors  for  a  number  of  years  to  admit  the  workers 
on  new  systems  of  manufacturing  custom  clothing  was  an  eco- 
nomic mistake.  If  they  had  assumed  jurisdiction  over  the  new 
systems,  several  results  might  have  been  expected: 

( 1 )  The  new  systems  being  almost  without  exception  carried 
on  in  workshops  and  on  a  basis  of  time  payment,  conditions  for 
standardization  of  hours  and  wages  would  have  been  more  favor- 
able than  they  had  ever  been  under  the  old  systems,  and  it  is 
probable  that  considerable  improvements  could  have  been  ef- 
fected. 

(2)  In  this  event  the  so-called  cheap  custom  trade  would  not 


128  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [556 

have  been  as  cheap  as  at  present,  and  the  fine  trade  would  not 
have  been  undermined  as  rapidly. 

(3)  In  so  far  as  the  fine  trade  did  suffer  from  the  competition 
of  the  cheaper  systems,  the  tailors  displaced  would  have  been 
enabled,  on  account  of  the  improved  conditions  in  the  cheaper 
trade,  to  obtain  work  there  at  living  wages. 

(4)  Where  the  journeymen  tailors  found  it   necessary  to 
strike  for  their  demands,  it  would  not  have  been  so  easy  for  the 
employers  to  get  their  work  done  on  the  cheaper  systems. 

As  frequently  pointed  out  by  the  advocates  of  admitting  the 
cheap  custom  tailors,  all  of  these  results  would  have  been  a  bene- 
fit to  the  skilled  journeymen.  However,  these  arguments  were 
not  sufficient  to  overcome  the  prejudice  on  the  part  of  the  skilled 
tailors  against  the  cheaper  workers,  nor  the  fear  on  the  part  of 
the  tailors  in  the  smaller  towns  that  the  slightest  encouragement 
from  the  union  would  accelerate  the  movement  of  the  trade  to 
the  larger  cities,  in  which,  in  the  main,  the  cheaper  systems  were 
being  carried  on.  Where  these  tailors  made  their  mistake  was  in 
the  belief  that  the  movement  in  question  could  be  checked  by  any 
means  whatever.  The  new  systems  afforded  an  opportunity  to 
satisfy  a  popular  demand  at  less  cost.  This  being  true,  the 
drift  of  the  work  away  from  the  old  systems  was  inevitable,  and 
could  not  be  materially  affected  by  any  opposition  or  prejudice 
on  the  part  of  the  unionists ;  whereas  if  they  had  undertaken  to 
organize  the  new  systems,  they  could  not,  indeed,  have  prevented 
their  establishment,  but  might  have  had  a  voice  in  their  manage- 
ment. It  is  admitted  that  the  tailors  in  recent  days  have  seen 
their  error  and  endeavored  to  adopt  a  different  policy,  but  it  is 
now  rather  late  to  make  the  change,  inasmuch  as  the  class  of 
trade  involved  has  either  drifted  into  contractors'  shops,  where 
much  of  it  has  remained  unorganized,  or  else  it  has  been  organ- 
ized by  the  garment  workers'  unions,  who  have  had  neither 
the  strong  motives  nor  the  financial  resources  that  the  tailors 
would  have  had  to  raise  it  to  a  higher  plane. 


CHAPTER  IV 
GENERAL  ECONOMIC  BEARINGS 

It  is  the  purpose  of  this  chapter  to  consider  some  of  the  gen- 
eral economic  consequences  of  the  presence  and  activity  of  unions 
in  the  custom  tailoring  trade. 

For  purposes  of  economic  analysis  we  consider  that  portion  of 
the  clothing  industry  which  is  concerned  with  the  making  to 
order  of  coats,  vests,  trousers  and  overcoats.1  In  general,  the 
customer  desiring  to  purchase  any  of  these  garments  has  his 
choice  of  garments  made  under  four  different  systems  of  pro- 
duction; namely,  (1)  the  old-fashioned  journeymen  tailoring 
system;  (2)  the  team  or  sectional  system;  (3)  the  special  order 
system;  and  (4)  the  ready-made  or  garment  working  system.  In 
the  first  case  he  will  go  to  a  local  merchant  tailor,  who  will  take 
his  measure,  cut  the  pattern  or  have  it  cut,  and  turn  the  work 
over  to  skilled  journeymen  tailors  to  finish.  In  the  second  case 
he  will  also  deal  with  a  local  merchant  tailor,  but  the  work  will 
be  done  in  accord  with  the  new  system  of  subdividing  the  work 
which  we  have  already  described  in  connection  with  the  efficiency 
movement.2  In  the  third  case  he  will  deal  with  an  agent :  either 
a  traveling  man,  a  local  special  order  agent  dealing  exclusively 
in  that  line,  or  a  local  merchant  tailor  or  haberdasher  who  main- 
tains a  special  order  department.  The  agent  will  take  the  cus- 
tomer's measure  and  specifications  and  send  the  same  to  a  fac- 
tory, generally  in  another  city,  where  the  work  will  be  done 
under  a  highly  developed  system  of  subdivision,  employing  in 
the  main  employees  who  rank  as  garment  workers  rather  than 

1  We  do  not  forget  that  both  journeymen  tailors  and  garment  workers 
are  employed  in  the  making  of  clothing  for  women,  but  since  this  depart- 
ment of  the   industry   concerns  only  a  few  members  of  the  Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union,  it  is  considered  unnecessary  to  include  it  in  the  present 
analysis. 

2  Cf.  su.pra,  p.  51. 

129 


130  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [558 

tailors.  In  the  fourth  case  the  customer  will  go  to  a  ready-made 
clothing  store  and  from  the  proprietor's  stock  select  the  gar- 
ments which  suit  his  taste  and  come  the  nearest  to  a  proper  fit, 
these  garments  being  made  by  garment  workers  in  factories  un- 
der a  system  which  admits  of  even  a  higher  degree  of  subdivision 
than  the  "special  order,"  inasmuch  as  all  sections  of  garments 
can  be  made  in  quantities  and  standard  sizes. 

We  may  conceive  of  four  suits  of  clothes,  identical  in  materials 
and  specifications,  and  differing  only  in  the  fact  that  they  are 
made  under  the  four  different  systems  of  production  mentioned 
above.  In  order  to  arrive  at  a  conclusion  with  reference  to  the 
kind  of  effects  which  have  resulted  from  the  organization  of  un- 
ions in  the  custom  tailoring  trade,  we  may  assume  first  a  situa- 
tion in  which  there  are  no  unions  in  this  trade,  but  the  different 
systems  of  production  are  as  described.3  Let  us  assume  that  in 
such  a  situation  the  suit  made  on  the  first  system  costs  the  cus- 
tomer $30 ;  on  the  second  system,  $28 ;  on  the  third  system,  $25 ; 
and  on  the  fourth  system,  $22.  It  is  not  necessary  to  account 
for  all  of  the  possible  reasons  for  such  differences  in  prices ;  it  is 
reasonable  to  conclude,  however,  from  our  knowledge  of  the  sev- 
eral systems  of  production,  that  if  such  differences  in  price  exist, 
they  are  due  in  the  main  to  two  causes:  (a)  differences  in  labor 
costs;  (b)  differences  in  the  scale  of  production,  the  ready-made 
system,  on  the  whole,  having  the  greatest  advantage  in  this 
respect. 

Into  a  situation  like  the  above,  let  us  now  suppose  that  the 

3  This  assumption  involves  another,  namely,  that  in  the  absence  of 
unionism  the  four  different  systems  would  have  grown  up.  Upon  this 
point,  however,  we  believe  that  there  is  no  doubt.  The  rise  of  the  ready- 
made  clothing  industry  in  the  first  instance  was  due  to  the  demand  for 
cheaper  clothing  than  could  be  made  to  the  order  and  measure  of  each  cus- 
tomer, even  under  a  completely  non-union  regime.  The  very  rapid  develop- 
ment of  the  same  industry  was  due  to  the  invention  of  the  sewing  machine 
and  the  organization  of  the  industry  on  a  large  scale  in  factories,  and  there 
is  no  reason  to  believe  that  unionism  was  the  determining  cause  of  either 
of  these  phenomena.  Given  the  ready-made  industry,  the  development  of 
methods  of  making  custom  clothing  by  which  the  competition  of  the  ready- 
made  could  be  met  in  part  was  also  inevitable,  inasmuch  as  the  methods  of 
making  ready-made  clothing  lent  themselves  to  the  making  of  clothing  to 
measure,  were  cheaper,  and  were  known  to  enterprisers  who  were  under 
pressure  to  retain  their  hold  upon  the  custom  trade. 


559]  GENERAL  ECONOMIC   BEARINGS  131 

element  of  unionism  in  the  field  of  custom  tailoring  is  gradually 
injected,  until  workers  in  this  field  are  organized  to  the  same 
extent  as  at  present.  In  this  event  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  wages  of  custom  tailors  will  be  raised;  and  if,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  we  assume  that  unionism  in  some  form  has 
reached  all  three  of  the  establishments  in  which  the  three  custom- 
made  suits  of  our  illustration  were  manufactured,  we  may  assume 
that  wages  and  labor  costs  have  been  increased  for  all  of  these 
establishments,  but  in  a  different  measure  in  each,  inasmuch  as 
unionism  is  strongest  in  the  journeymen  tailors'  trade,  less 
strong  in  the  ' '  sectional ' '  trade,  and  weakest  in  the  special  order 
trade.  Let  us  assume  that  under  the  new  conditions,  in  order  to 
make  the  same  percentage  of  profit  as  before,  the  merchant  tailor 
employing  the  old  system  must  sell  the  suit  for  $35 ;  the  mer- 
chant tailor  employing  the  sectional  system,  for  $30;  and  the 
special  order  firm,  for  $26.  We  may  suppose  the  existence  of 
certain  buyers,  who  were  just  willing  to  pay  $3  for  the  superior- 
ity of  the  special  order  suit  over  the  ready-made  suit ;  $3  for  the 
superiority  of  the  "sectional"  suit  over  the  special  order  suit; 
and  $2  for  the  superiority  of  the  journeyman  tailored  suit  over 
the  "sectional"  suit.  These  buyers,  under  the  circumstances  of 
our  problem  as  first  phrased,  would  be  indifferent  as  to  whether 
they  purchased  the  $22  ready-made  suit,  the  $25  special  order 
suit,  the  $28  "sectional  "  suit,  or  the  $30  journeyman  tailored 
suit.  But  under  the  new  circumstances  it  is  no  longer  a  matter 
of  indifference  with  these  buyers  which  suit  they  purchase.  Each 
of  them  will  now  prefer  the  ready-made  suit  at  $22  to  any  of  the 
other  suits. 

There  is  another  class  of  buyers,  we  may  assume,  who  insist 
on  a  suit  made  to  the  individual  order  and  measure,  and  for 
whom  under  the  first  conditions  it  would  be  a  matter  of  indiffer- 
ence which  of  the  three  custom-made  suits  they  bought ;  we  will 
assume,  as  in  the  case  of  the  other  group  of  buyers,  that  a  jour- 
neyman tailored  suit  is  worth  to  them  just  $2  more  than  a  "sec- 
tional" suit;  and  a  sectional  suit  just  $3  more  than  a  special 
order  suit.  Under  the  new  conditions  a  "sectional"  suit  will 
cost  $4  more  than  a  special  order  suit,  and  a  journeyman  tailored 
suit  $5  more  than  a  "sectional"  suit.  It  is  obvious  that  under 
these  conditions  such  buyers  will  purchase  the  special  order  suit, 


132  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [560 

and  that  the  merchant  tailor  will  lose  their  trade.  In  a  similar 
way  it  can  be  shown,  that  even  among  buyers  whose  tastes  con- 
fine them  either  to  "sectional"  or  to  old-style  journeyman  tailor- 
ing, a  rise  in  prices  such  as  we  have  assumed,  which  adds  more  to 
the  price  of  the  journeyman  tailored  suit  than  it  does  to  the  price 
of  the  sectional  suit,  will  cause  some  buyers  to  abandon  the  for- 
mer in  favor  of  the  latter.  It  is  only  the  buyers  who  insist  upon 
a  journeyman  tailored  suit  under  all  circumstances,  being  per- 
sons who  can  afford  to  take  this  stand,  who  will  continue  with 
certainty  to  purchase  the  journeyman  tailored  suits. 

From  the  above  argument  we  conclude  that  the  introduction 
of  unionism  into  the  custom  tailoring  industry  should  have  the 
effect:  (1)  of  reducing  the  proportion  which  clothing  made  to 
measure  bears  to  all  clothing  manufactured  and  sold;4  (2)  of 
affecting  unequally  wages  and  prices  in  different  branches  of 
the  custom  tailoring  field,  resulting  in  a  redistribution  of  the 
patronage  within  this  field,  to  the  disadvantage  of  those  branches 
in  which  prices  are  raised  the  most.5 

These  conclusions  are  difficult  to  verify  from  observation  and 

4  The  same  conclusion  should  hold  good,  no  matter  what  is  the  historical 
order  of  the  introduction  of  the  different  systems  of  production.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  there  was  a  time  when  custom  tailoring  held  practically  the 
entire  field,  and  the  large  development  of  the  ready-made,  sectional  and 
special  order  systems  is  decidedly  recent;  moreover,  there  were  unions  of 
custom  tailors  long  before  any  of  these  systems  acquired  any  considerable 
proportions;  whereas  in  our  illustration  we  assumed  that  the  ready-made 
and  other  new  systems  were  fully  developed  when  unionism  was  injected 
into  the  custom  tailoring  field.  Either  in  the  actual  case  or  in  the  assumed 
case,  the  field  of  custom  tailoring,  as  compared  with  the  whole  field  of 
clothing,  is  narrowed;  and  in  both  cases,  after  the  garment  working  in- 
dustry comes  into  existence,  the  narrowing  of  the  custom  field  is  due  to  the 
process  described,  whereby  a  portion  of  the  custom  trade  is  transferred  to 
the  ready-made;  but  before  the  ready-made  industry  came  into  existence  in 
its  present  form,  the  presence  of  unions  in  the  custom  field,  in  so  far  as  it 
raised  prices  in  that  field,  narrowed  the  field  by  stimulating  the  initiation 
of  the  ready-made  system,  as  well  as  by  inducing  greater  economy  in  cloth- 
ing or  by  inducing  a  larger  use  of  substitutes  (for  example,  second-hand 
clothing). 

s  We  have  ignored  hitherto  the  influence  of  unionism  in  the  garment 
working  trade,  as  a  matter  foreign  to  the  thesis,  but  it  is  obvious  that 
unionism  in  this  trade,  in  so  far  as  it  raises  the  price  of  ready-made 
clothing,  will  tend  to  retard  the  movement  of  patronage  to  this  field  from 
other  fields. 


561]  GENERAL  ECONOMIC   BEARINGS  133 

experience,  for  the  reason  that  the  ready-made  clothing  industry 
has  effects  upon  the  custom  tailoring  industry  of  precisely  the 
same  kind  as  those  which  we  should  expect  from  the  introduction 
of  unionism  in  the  custom  field.  The  competition  of  the  ready- 
made  clothing  industry,  independently  of  any  union  influences, 
tends  to  reduce  the  proportion  of  all  clothing  which  is  made  to 
measure,  and  to  affect  unequally  different  systems  of  production 
and  different  ranges  of  prices  within  the  custom  tailoring  field 
itself ;  effects  precisely  similar  to  those  which  our  analysis  showed 
should  result  from  the  organization  of  custom  tailors  into  unions. 
There  are  no  statistical  data  at  hand  for  examining  directly  the 
consequences,  either  of  the  ready-made  clothing  industry  or  of 
the  introduction  of  unionism ;  nor  for  separating  the  consequen- 
ces of  these  two  causes.  There  is  no  doubt,  however,  that  in  the 
past  fifty  years  the  proportion  of  all  clothing  made  to  measure 
has  greatly  decreased,  while  there  has  been  a  corresponding  in- 
crease in  the  proportion  of  ready-made  clothing ;  and  in  the  past 
twenty  years  it  is  the  writer's  opinion  that  the  old-style  mer- 
chant tailoring  has  lost  quite  as  much  trade  to  the  sectional 
and  special  order  systems  as  to  the  ready-made  system.  The  old- 
style  tailoring  has  held  its  own  fairly  well  within  a  range  of 
prices  of  suits  from  $50  to  $150,  but  in  the  case  of  suits  ranging 
from  $50  down  to  $20  the  competition  of  the  new  systems  of 
custom  tailoring  and  of  the  ready-made  system  has  been  keen. 
As  far  as  the  results  of  unionism  in  the  custom  tailoring  trade 
are  concerned,  they  appear  to  have  been  the  following : 

(1)  There  has  been  an  increase  of  wages,  which  in  the  case 
of  the  higher  priced  suits  the  merchant  tailor  has  found  it  pos- 
sible to  pass  along  to  the  consumer,  but  which  in  the  case  of  the 
lower  priced  suits  has  obliged  the  merchant  tailor  to  accept 
lower  profits,  and,  coupled  with  other  causes,  has  driven  some 
merchant  tailors  out  of  business.     In  general,  the  increase  of 
wages  has  contributed  to  decreasing  the  proportion  of  all  cloth- 
ing that  is  made  to  measure. 

(2)  The  increase  of  wages  in  the  case  of  journeymen  tailors 
employed  on  the  old  system  has  accelerated  the  movement  to- 
ward new  and  cheaper  systems  of  production  of  custom-made 
clothing,  which  developed,  for  a  time  at  least,  outside  of  union 
influence,  on  account  of  the  exclusive  policy  of  the  Journeymen 
Tailors'  Union. 


134  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [562 

(3)  The  field  of  custom  tailoring  on  the  old  system  has  been 
narrowed,  and  the  number  of  journeymen  employed  on  this  sys- 
tem reduced,  more  rapidly  than  would  have  been  the  case  had 
there  been  no  union. 

(4)  The  wages  of  individual  journeymen  have  been  greater, 
and  more  uniform  as  between  different  firms,  than  they  would 
have  been  if  there  had  been  no  union. 

From  the  standpoint  of  the  employer,  therefore,  the  effect  of 
unionism  in  the  custom  tailoring  trade  has  been  to  increase  the 
pressure,  already  strong  on  account  of  the  competition  of  the 
ready-made  system,  tending  to  reduce  his  profits.  At  the  same 
time,  within  those  ranges  of  prices  somewhat  out  of  reach  of  the 
competition  of  the  ready-made  system,  unionism  has  tended  to 
prevent  price-cutting  among  merchant  tailors,  and  to  hold  up  to 
some  extent  standards  of  quality  and  workmanship. 

From  the  standpoint  of  the  consumer,  unionism  in  the  custom 
tailoring  trade  has  not  meant  depriving  the  consumer  of  cheap 
clothing,  because  he  could  always  avail  himself  of  the  ready- 
made,  but  it  has  meant  that  he  has  had  to  pay  more  for  the 
luxury  of  having  his  clothing  made  to  measure ;  and  the  ' '  mar- 
ginal consumer"  for  custom-made  clothing  at  the  increased 
prices  has  been  obliged  to  satisfy  himself  with  a  lower  grade. 


GLOSSARY 

Journeyman  tailor :-  a  tailor  who  has  learned  through  a  definite 
apprenticeship  or  equivalent  training  how  to  make  an  entire 
garment  by  his  own  labor,  and  who  is  employed  upon  clothing 
made  to  the  order  and  measure  of  the  individual  customer. 

Individual  system :- system  under  which  the  journeyman  tailor 
alone,  or  assisted  by  one  or  more  helpers  hired  by  himself  and 
under  his  supervision,  makes  the  entire  garment. 

Sectional  or  team  system :-  system  under  which  each  garment  or 
suit  is  made  by  a  "team"  composed  of  a  relatively  small  num- 
ber of  workers,  each  skilled  in  some  particular  process. 

Factory  system :- system  under  which  the  garment  or  suit  is 
made  in  a  factory,  like  ready-made  clothing,  under  a  highly 
developed  system  of  subdivision ;  differs  from  the  manufacture 
of  ready-made  clothing  only  in  the  fact  that  each  garment  or 
suit  is  made  to  fit  the  specifications  of  the  individual  customer. 

"Old-line"  or  "old-style"  tailoring :- tailoring  done  by  skilled 
journeymen  tailors  working  on  the  individual  system. 

Fine  store,  fine  trade :-  these  expressions  are  used  to  distinguish 
merchant  tailoring  establishments  selling  suits  within  the  ap- 
proximate price  range  of  $35  to  $150,  and  employing  the  indi- 
vidual system  or  a  sectional  system  capable  of  turning  out  an 
equally  high  grade  of  work. 

Cheap  trade :-  applied  to  suits  made  to  measure,  but  selling  in 
general  from  $35  down;  especially  applied  to  clothing  sold 
under  the  mail  order  or  agency  system,  and  made  under  the 
factory  system. 

Bushelman:-a  journeyman  tailor  employed  by  a  merchant  tai- 
loring establishment  or  by  a  ready-made  clothing  establishment 
to  make  alterations  and  repairs  in  clothing  after  it  is  finished. 

Single-handed :-  without  helpers. 


135 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

I.  PUBLICATIONS  OF  LABOR  UNIONS  AND  EMPLOYERS'  ASSOCIA- 
TIONS 

AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR.  Proceedings  of  the  Conven- 
tions, 1881-1916.  (All  recent  numbers  published  in  Washing- 
ton.) 

AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR.  Miscellaneous  circulars  and 
pamphlets. 

American  Federationist.    Monthly.    1894 — .  Washington,  D.  C. 

Garment  Worker,  The.  (  Formerly  The  Weekly  Bulletin  of  the 
Clothing  Trades.)  Official  organ  of  the  United  Garment 
Workers  of  America.  New  York.  1901 — . 

Journal  of  United  Labor.  1880-1889.  Official  organ  of  the 
Knights  of  Labor.  Marblehead,  Pittsburgh  and  Philadelphia. 

NATIONAL  ASSOCIATION  OF  MERCHANT  TAILORS  OF  AMERICA.  Offi- 
cial Record  of  the  Seventh  Annual  Convention.  Printed, 
1916,  by  J.  C.  Miller,  Jr.,  Medford,  Mass. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  TRADE'S  UNION,  JOURNEYMEN.  Constitution 
and  By-laws,  English  and  German  editions,  Philadelphia,  1865. 

TAILORS'  INTERNATIONAL  TRADE'S  UNION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
AND  CANADA,  JOURNEYMEN.  Proceedings  of  the  Eighth  An- 
nual Convention,  Norfolk,  Va.,  1873.  Pub.  New  York,  1873. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  TRADE'S  UNION,  JOURNEYMEN.  Proceedings 
of  the  Ninth  Annual  Convention,  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  1874.  Pub. 
New  York,  1874. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  TRADE'S  UNION,  JOURNEYMEN.  Proceedings 
of  the  Tenth  Annual  Convention,  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  1875.  Ger- 
man edition.  Pub.  New  York,  1875. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  TRADE'S  UNION,  JOURNEYMEN.  Proceedings 
of  the  Eleventh  Annual  Convention,  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  1876. 
German  edition.  Pub.  St.  Louis,  1876. 

136 


565]  BIBLIOGRAPHY  137 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  TRADE'S  UNION,  JOURNEYMEN.  Twelfth  An- 
nual Report  of  Officers,  1877.  Pub.  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  1877. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  UNION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  JOURNEYMEN. 
Constitution  and  By-laws,  also  Proceedings  of  the  2d  Annual 
Convention,  Chicago,  Aug.  11-14, 1884.  Pub.  New  York,  1884. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  UNION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  JOURNEYMEN. 
Constitution  and  By-laws,  also  Proceedings  of  3rd  Annual 
Convention,  Baltimore,  August  10-15,  1885.  Pub.  New  York, 
1885. 

TAILORS'  NATIONAL  UNION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  JOURNEYMEN. 
Constitution  and  By-laws,  1887.  Pub.  New  York,  1888. 

TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA,  JOURNEYMEN.  Constitutions  of 
1889, 1894, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1902,  1904, 1906,  1908,  1910,  1914. 
Pub.  New  York  and  Bloomington,  111. 

Tailor,  The.  Official  Organ  of  the  Journeymen  Tailors'  Union  of 
America.  Monthly  to  August  1,  1914,  then  weekly.  New 
York,  1887-1895.  Bloomington,  111.,  1895-May,  1914.  Chi- 
cago, May,  1914 . 

II.    OFFICIAL  PUBLICATIONS 

CENSUS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.  Decennial  since  1790.  Wash- 
ington, D.  C. 

COLORADO.    1st  Biennial  Report  of  the  Bureau  of  Labor  Statis- 
tics, Denver;  1888 ;  also  report  for  1899-1900. 
INDUSTRIAL  COMMISSION,  Report  of  the  United  States.    19  vols. 

Washington,  D.  C.,  1900-1902. 

MASSACHUSETTS,    llth  Annual  Report  of  the  Bureau  of  Statis- 
tics of  Labor.    Boston,  1880. 
UNITED  STATES  BUREAU  OF  LABOR.     Third  Annual  Report,  on 

Strikes  and  Lockouts,  1881-1886.    Washington,  D.  C.,  1887. 
Woman  and  Child  Wage-Earners  in  the  United  States,  Report  on 
Condition  of.     Published  as  Senate  Document  No.  645,  61st 
Congress,  2d  Session.    19  vols.    Especially: 
Vol.  9.     Sumner,  Helen  L.,  History  of  Women  in  Industry 

in  the  United  States.    Washington,  D.  C.,  1910. 
Vol.  10.     Andrews,  John  B.,  and  Bliss,  W.  D.  P.,  History 
of  Women  in  Trade  Unions.    Washington,  D.  C.,  1911. 


138  THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA  [566 

III.    MISCELLANEOUS 
A.    Books  and  Articles 

ABBOTT,  EDITH,  Women  in  Industry.    New  York,  1910. 

ADAMS,  T.  S.,  AND  SUMNER,  HELEN,  Labor  Problems.  New  York, 
1905. 

ASHWORTH,  JOHN  H.,  The  Helper  and  American  Trade  Unions. 
Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Press,  1915. 

BARNETT,  GEORGE  E.  (EDITOR),  Trial  Bibliography  of  American 
Trade  Union  Publications.  Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Press. 
1904. 

BRENTANO,  LUJO,  On  the  History  and  Development  of  Gilds  and 
the  Origin  of  Trade  Unions.  London,  1870. 

BRUCE,  P.  A.,  Economic  History  of  Virginia  in  the  Seventeenth 
Century.  2  vols.  New  York,  Macmillan,  1896. 

CARLTON,  FRANK  T.,  History  and  Problems  of  Organized  Labor. 
Heath  &  Co.,  Boston,  1911. 

CLARK,  L.  D.,  Law  of  the  Employment  of  Labor.  New  York, 
Macmillan,  1911. 

COMMONS,  JOHN  R.,  AND  ANDREWS,  JOHN  B.,  (EDITORS),  Docu- 
mentary History  of  American  Industrial  Society.  10  vols.  A. 
H.  Clark  Co.,  Cleveland,  1910. 

COMMONS,  JOHN  R.,  "The  American  Shoemakers,  1648-1895." 
In  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  Vol.  24,  November,  1909. 

GALTON,  FRANK  W.,  The  Tailoring  Trade.  Published  in  a  series 
entitled,  "Select  documents  illustrating  the  history  of  trade 
unionism. ' '  Edited  under  the  direction  of  the  London  School 
of  Economics  and  Political  Science.  London,  1896. 

McCABE,  D.  A.,  The  Standard  Rate  in  American  Trade  Unions. 
Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Press,  1912. 

MCMASTER,  JOHN  B.,  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States. 
1  vols.  New  York,  Appleton,  1892. 

POPE,  JESSE  E.,  Clothing  Industry  in  New  York.  In  Missouri 
University  Studies  in  Social  Science,  vol.  1,  1905. 

STOWELL,  C.  J.,  Studies  in  Trade  Unionism  in  the  Custom  Tai- 
loring Trade.  Bloomington,  111.,  1913.  Published  by  the  Jour- 
neymen Tailors'  Union  of  America.  (Present  headquarters, 
Chicago.) 

THWAITES,  REUBEN  G.  (EDITOR),  Early  Western  Travels,  1748- 
1846.  32  vols.  Cleveland,  Ohio,  1906. 


567]  BIBLIOGRAPHY  139 

UNWIN,  GEORGE,  Gilds  and  Companies  of  London.  London,  1908. 

WEBB,  SYDNEY  AND  BEATRICE,  History  of  Trade  Unionism.  New 
edition,  Longmans,  New  York,  1911. 

WEBB,  SYDNEY  AND  BEATRICE,  Industrial  Democracy.  2  vols, 
Longmans,  New  York,  1897. 

WILLETT,  MABEL  H.,  Employment  of  Women  in  the  Clothing 
Trade.  New  York,  1902. 

WOLFE,  F.  E.,  Admission  to  American  Trade  Unions.  Balti- 
more, Johns  Hopkins  Press,  1912. 

B.     Periodicals 

American  Gentleman,  The.    American  Fashion  Co.,  New  York. 

Monthly.     1901 

American  Tailor  and  Cutter,  The.    Published  by  the  John  J. 

Mitchell  Co.,  New  York.    Monthly.    1878— 
Baltimore  Evening  Sun.    Baltimore,  Maryland. 
Commercial  Handbook  of  Canada.    Toronto,  1912. 

Jewish  Daily  Forward.     (Yiddish.)     New  York,  1897 

Sartorial  Art  Journal.    Published  by  the  John  J.  Mitchell  Co., 

New  York.    Monthly.    1873 

Tale  Review,  The.    New  Haven,  1892 


INDEX 


Amalgamated   Clothing   Workers  of 

America 

Agreement,  113 ;  amalgamation, 
122;  constitution,  115;  conven- 
tions, 118,  124;  Garment  Work- 
ers' branch,  116;  Journeymen 
Tailors'  department,  116 

American  Federation  of  Labor,  56, 
86,  92,  97,  104,  120 

American  Gentleman,  The,  79 

Apprentices 

Age  limit,  78;  compulsory  admis- 
sion, 67;  distinguished  from 
helpers,  65,  79;  dues,  72,  103; 
eligibility  to  union.  66;  limita- 
tion of  number,  69,  74;  regula- 
tions, 53,  66,  72 ;  voting,  71 

Arbitration.     See  Merchant  Tailors' 
Exchange 

Atlanta,  47 

Back  shops.    See  systems  of  produc- 
tion 

Bell's  (N.  Y.),  97 

Benefits 

Sick,  103;  death,  103,  104;  strike, 
53-56,  103,  104 

Bill  of  prices,  27,  31 
See  collective  agreement 

Black-list,  54 

Bloomington,  111.,  102 

Boston,  26,  76 

Boycott,  57 

Brais,  Secretary,  18,  46,  98,  101,  105, 
107,  115,  116 

Brantford,  Ont.,  100 

Buffalo,  96,  107 

Burlington,   la.,   50 

Bushelmen,  27,  94 

Canada,  31 


Carlquist,  Organizer,  76 

Cheap  trade,  87,  90,  96,  127 

Chicago,  60,  75,  117;  strikes  in,  110 

Cincinnati,  74 

Cleveland,  56,  74,  111 

Clothing  Workers  of  America.  See 
Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers 

Closed  shop,  definition  of  term,  22 

Collective  agreement,  19;  renewal, 
.20 

Colorado  Industrial  Commission.  See 
industrial 

Committee  on  laws  and  audit, 
origin  and  functions,  16 

Conference  committee.  See  employ- 
ers, negotiations  with 

Conventions,  J.  T.  U.  of  A.,  15,  17, 
95,  96,  102,  107 

Contractors,  39,  71 

Cost  accounting.     See  labor 

Custom  Clothing  Makers'  Union,  92- 
93 

Custom  tailoring,  82.  See  special 
order  trade 

Custom  tailors'  union,  85 

Denver,  49,  56,  58,  60 

Earnings  of  tailors,  average  yearly, 
33 

"Efficiency"  movement,  50 

Employers,  negotiations  with,  13; 
conference  committee,  14,  15; 
shop  meeting,  14 

England,  39,  49 

English-made  clothing,  importation 
of,  15 

European  Socialists,  127.  See  pol- 
itics 

Free  shops.  See  systems  of  produc- 
tion 


141 


142 


THE  JOURNEYMEN  TAILORS'  UNION  OF  AMERICA 


[570 


Garment  Workers'  Union,  76;  label, 
87;  proposed  amalgamation,  99; 
strike,  102 

Globe  Tailoring  Company,  89 

Gompers,  Samuel,  106,  107,  109 

Helpers,   wages,  29,  33;    dues,   103. 
See  apprentice 

Hillman,  Sidney,  113,  114,  116,  119 

Hillman  union.  See  Amalgamated 
Clothing  Workers 

Hours.    See  labor,  hours  of 

Houston,  Tex.,  66 

Industrial  Commission  of  Colorado, 
58 

Industrial  education,  81 

Industrial  unionism.  See  politics, 
also  unionism 

Initiation  fee.    See  union 

International  Ladies'  Garment  Work- 
ers Union,  86 

Itinerant  system.  See  systems  of 
production 

Jacobs  Company,  M.  M.,  87 

Jensen,  Frederick,  18 

Journeymen  Tailors'  Department  of 
the  Amalgamated  Clothing 
Workers  of  America.  See 
Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers 

Journeymen      Tailors'      Union      of 

America 
Amalgamation  proposed,  101,  113; 

withdrawal  from,  125 
Constitution  amended,  30,  42,  88; 

label,  23,  89,  120 
See  Amalgamated  Clothing  Work- 
ers, Ladies'  Garment  Workers, 
special  order  trade,  United  Gar- 
ment Workers 

Kahn;  98 

Kansas  City,  56 

Knights  of  Labor,  83 

Label.  See  Journeymen  Tailors' 
Union  of  America 

Labor,  hours  of,  35-37,  60;  cost  ac- 
counting, 50, 130-131 ;  female,  75 

Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union, 
126;  convention,  111;  proposed 


amalgamation  with  J.  T.  U.  of 

A.,  99,  105 
See  Journeymen  Tailors '  Union  of 

America 
Lapan,  T.,  116 
Larger,  Secretary,  111 
Lennon,  Secretary,  15,  18,  21,  43,  45, 

48,  68,  76,  84,  87,  92,  97,  107, 

125 
Lockouts 

Definition    of,    53;    statistics,    61- 

63;   "victimized"  members,  53 
See  strikes 
Los  Angeles,  56 
Losse,  J.  W.,  89 

Materials,  classification  of,  28,  50 
Merchant  Tailors'  Exchange,  14,  15, 

16;    arbitration    proposed,    17; 

membership,     19;     opposed     to 

J.  T.  U.  of  A.,  15 

Merchant     Tailors'     National     Ex- 
change.    See  Merchant  Tailors' 

Exchange 

Merchant  Tailors'  National  Protec- 
tive Association,  16 
Milwaukee,  47 
Munich,  81 

Mutual  benefit  fund,  16 
Nashville,  Tenn.,  112 
National    Association    of    Merchant 

Tailors  of  America,  18 
Newark,  N.  J.,  100 
New  York  City,  14,  18,   26,  29,  86, 

95,  99,  112,  114,  122 ;  strikes  in, 

47,  102,  110 
Nicoll  the  Tailor,  89 
Non-union  shop,  22 
Open  shop,  agitation,  21;   definition 

of  term,  22 

Piece  scales.    See  wages 
Piece  system.     See  systems  of  pro- 
duction 
Politics 

Influence    of,    85,    103,    107-111, 

127;    industrial   unionists,    109; 

Socialists,  85,  103,  109 
Portland,  Ore.,  47 


571] 


INDEX 


143 


Price  bills,  31 

Providence,  76 

Beady-made  clothing  industry,  82 

Kickert,  President,  111 

Eochester,  N.  Y.,  114,  122 

San  Francisco,  30,  47 

Schlossberg,  Joseph,  114,  116 

Scotch  Woolen  Mills,  98 

Seattle,  30,  47 

Sewing  machine,  effect  on  produc- 
tion systems,  39,  82 

Shop  meeting.  See  employers,  nego- 
tiations with 

Shop  steward,  26 

Shop  tailoring.  See  ready-made 
clothing  industry 

Socialists.     See  politics 

Special  order  trade,  82,  89,  92,  97; 
jurisdiction  conceded  to  Gar- 
ment Workers,  93;  unionism, 
effects  on,  133 

St.  Louis,  100 

St.  Paul,  18,  47,  121 

Strike  benefit,  55;  regulations,  56 

Strikes 

Avoidance  of,  15,  21,  32,  57,  58; 
definition  of,  53 ;  garment  work- 
ers, 110;  policy  of  the  union, 
54,  60;  regulations,  56,  58;  set- 
tlement of,  24,  58;  statistics, 
61-63 
See  benefits 

Sub-bosses.     See  contractors 

Sweating  system,  39,  42 

Sweeney,  Thomas,  117,  123,  126 

Systems  of  production 

Back  shop,  60;  free  shops,  40-47; 
home  work,  39;  itinerant,  38; 
"old-line,"  51,  95,  129;  piece, 
48;  ready-made,  129;  shop,  38; 


special  order,  129;  "team,"  51, 
83,  97,  129 

Tailors'  Industrial  Union,  Interna- 
tional, 103 

Tailors'  Progressive  Union  of  Amer- 
ica, 83 

Tailors,  skilled,  34;  supply,  78 

Tariff  laws  affecting  tailoring  in- 
dustry, 15 

"Time  log,"  31 

Trade  caste,  91 

Trade  schools,  81 

Union 

Initiation    fee,    26;    membership, 
24-26;   recognition  of,  20;  reg- 
ulations,  26,   72;    shop,   22,   24- 
25;  terms,  26 
See  apprentices 

Unionism 

Industrial  and  craft,  103,  106-7, 
111 ;  effect  on  custom  tailoring, 
133 

United  Garment  Workers  of  Amer- 
ica, 86,  104;  amalgamation  pro- 
posed with  J.  T.  U.  of  A.,  95, 
111-113 

' '  Victimized ' '  members.  See  lock- 
out 

Wages,  97,  133 ;  increases  and  reduc- 
tions, 31;  piece  scale,  27,  49; 
weekly  scale,  30,  49;  yearly 
earnings,  33 

Washington,  D.  C.,  18,  101 

Weekly  Bulletin,  101 

Weekly  scales,  in  Seattle,  30;   sub- 
stituted for  piece  system,  97 
See  wages 

Winnipeg,  47 

Workshops.  See  systems  of  produc- 
tion 


ILLINOIS  BIOLOGICAL  MONOGRAPHS 

Vol.  I 
Nos.  1  and  2.     A  revision  of  the  cestode  family  proteocephalidae.     With 

16  plates.     By  G.  R.  La  Rue.     $2.00. 
No.  3.     Studies  on   the  cestode  family   anoplocephalidae.     With   6   plates. 

By  H.  Douthitt.     80  cents. 
No.  4.     Larval  trematodes  from  North  American  fresh-water  snails.     With 

8  plates.     By  W.  W.  Cort.     $1.20. 

Vol.  II 
No.  1.     The   classification   of   lepidopterous   larvae.     With    10   plates.     By 

S.  B.  Fracker.     $1.50. 
No.  2.     On  the  osteology  of  some  of  the  loricati.     With  2  plates.     By  John 

E.  Gutberlet.     50  cents. 

No.  3.     Studies  of  gregarines.    With  15  plates.    By  Minnie  E.  Watson.    $2.00. 
No.  4.     The  genus  meliola  in  Porto  Rico.     With  5  plates.     By  Frank  L. 

Steveiig.     75  cents. 

Vol.  Ill 
No.  1.     Studies  on  the  factors  controlling  the  rate  of  regeneration.     By 

Charles  Zeleny.     $1.25. 
No.  2.     The   head-capsule  and   mouth-parts   of   Diptera.     With   25   plates. 

By  Alvah  Peterson.     $2.00. 
No.  3.     Studies   on   North   American    Polystomidae,   Aspidogastridae,    and 

Paramphistomidae.  With  11  plates.  By  Horace  W.  Stunkard.  $1.25. 
No.  4.     Color  and  color-pattern  mechanism  of  tiger  beetles.    With  29  black 

and  3  colored  plates.    By  Victor  E.  Shelford.    $2.00. 

Vol.   IV 
No.  1.     Life  history  studies  on  Montana  trematodes.     With  9  plates.     By 

E.  C.  Faust.     $2.00. 
No.  2.     The  Goldfish  as  a  test  animal  in  the  study  of  toxicity.     By  Edwin 

B.  Powers.     $1.00. 
No.  3.     Morphology  and  biology  of  some  turbellaria  from  the  Mississippi 

Basin.     With  3  plates.     By  Ruth  Higley.     $1.25. 

UNIVERSITY   OF   ILLINOIS   STUDIES  IN  LANGUAGE  AND      , 
LITERATURE 

Vol.  I 
Nos.   1   and  2.     The  phonology  of  the  dialect  of  Aurland,   Norway.     By 

George  T.  Flom.     $1.25. 
Nos.  3  and  4.     Studies  in  the  Milton  tradition.    By  John  W.  Good.    $1.75. 

Vol.  II 

No.  1.     Thomas  Warton.     By  Clarissa  Rinaker.     $1.00. 
No.  2.     Illustrations  of  medieval  romance  on  tiles  from  Chertsey  Abbey. 

By  Roger  Sherman  Loomis.     75  cents. 

No.  3.     Joseph  Ritson,  a  critical  biography.    By  Henry  Alfred  Burd.    $1.00. 
No.  4.     Miscellanea  Hibernica.     By  Kuno  Meyer.     $1.00. 

Vol.  Ill 

No.  1.     The  Ad  Deum  Vadit  of  Jean  Gerson.     By  David  H.  CarnaJian.     $1.75. 
No.  2.     Tagalog  texts.    Part  I.    By  Leonard  Bloomfield.    $1.50. 
No.  3.     The  same.     Part  II.     Grammatical  analysis.     $3.00. 
No.  4.     The  same.     Part  III.     List  of  formations  and  glossary.     $1.50. 

Vol.  IV 
No.  1.     Madame   De   Stael's   literary   reputation    in   England.     By   R.    C. 

Whitford.     75  cents. 

No.  2.  Index  verborum  quae  in  Senecae  fabulis  necnon  in  Oetavia  prae- 
texta  reperiuntur.  Part  I.  By  W.  A.  Oldfather,  A.  S.  Pease, 
and  H.  V.  Canter.  $2.00. 


UNIVEBSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  STUDIES  IN  THE  SOCIAL  SCIENCES 

Vol.  V,  1916 

No.  1.  The  enforcement  of  international  law  through  municipal  law  in 
the  United  States.  By  Philip  Quincy  Wright.  $1.25. 

No.  2.     The  life  of  Jesse  W.  Fell.    By  Frances  M.  Morehouse.     60  cents. 

No.  3.  Land  tenure  in  the  United  States  with  special  reference  to  Illinois. 
By  Charles  L.  Stewart.  75  cents. 

No.  4.     Mine  taxation  in  the  United  States.     By  L.  E.  Young.     $1.50. 

Vol.  VI,  1917 

Nos.  1  and  2.     The  veto  power  of  the  governor  of  Illinois.     By  Niels  H. 

Dabel.     $1.00. 
No.  3.     Wage  bargaining  on  the  vessels  of  the  Great  Lakes.     By  H.  E. 

Hoagland.     $1.50. 
No.  4.     The  household  of  a  Tudor  nobleman.     By  P.  V.  B.  Jones.     $1.50. 

Vol.  VII,  1918 

Nos.  1  and  2.     Legislative  regulation  of  railway  finance  in  England.     By 

C.  C.  Wang.     $1.50. 

No.  3.     The  American  municipal  executive.     By  K.  M.  Story.     $1.25. 
No.  4.     The  Journeymen  Tailors'   Union  of  America.     A  study  in  trade 

union  policy.     By  Charles  J.  Stowell.     $1.00. 


Bequests  for  exchange  for  the  Studies  in  the  Social  Sciences,  the  Biologi- 
cal Monographs,  and  the  Studies  in  Language  and  Literature  should  be 
addressed  to  the  Exchange  Editor,  Library,  University  of  Illinois,  Urbana, 
111. 

All  communications  concerning  sale  or  subscription,  or  of  an  editorial 
nature,  should  be  addressed  to  the  Editor  of  the  University  Studies,  Uni- 
versity of  Illinois,  Urbana,  111.  The  subscription  price  of  each  series  is 
three  dollars  a  year.  The  prices  of  individual  monographs  are  shown  in 
the  lists  given  above. 


